Blurb:

In this passage a 10 th century Śaiva author, Bhaṭṭa Rāmakaṇṭha, attempts to establish the existence of a self against a Buddhist opponent. But after the Buddhist has made his initial contention, Rāmakaṇṭha responds not from his own point of view, but in the voice of a Naiyāyika. Rāmakaṇṭha has the Buddhist defeat the Naiyāyika, followed by a Vaiśeṣika and a Sāṃkhya. Only then does Rāmakaṇṭha begin writing in his own voice. He presents his Śaiva view of the self as superior to that of the Naiyāyikas, Vaiśeṣikas and Sāṃkhyas in that it is not susceptible to the Buddhist arguments that are capable of destroying them. One of the differences between the Naiyāyika, Vaiśeṣika and Sāṃkhya views, on the one hand, and Rāmakaṇṭha’s Śaiva view, on the other, is that for the former the self can only be inferred, whereas for Rāmakaṇṭha it can be perceived. The other important difference concerns the relationship between the self and the stream of “consciousness” or “cognition” (jñāna). For the Naiyāyikas, Vaiśeṣikas and Sāṃkhyas, self and cognition are ontologically distinct. For Rāmakaṇṭha they are the same thing. The self consists in the constant shining forth of cognition. The crucial difference between the Buddhist view and the Śaiva view is that for the former cognition is momentary, whereas for the latter it persists uninterrupted.