necessarily with the cognition of objects, nor does the self show itself as the knower of all knowledge of objects, but the self is apprehended by a separate mental intuition which we represent as the “I.”  The self does not reveal itself as the knower but as an object of a separate intuitive process of the mind.  This is indeed different from Prabhakara’s analysis, who regarded the cognition of self as inseparable from the object-cognition, both being the result of the illumination of knowledge.  Kumarila agrees with Prabhakara however in holding that soul is not self-illuminating (svayamprakas’a), for then even in deep sleep the soul should have manifested itself; but there is no such manifestation then, and the state of deep sleep appears as an unconscious state.  There is also no bliss in deep sleep, for had it been so people would not have regretted that they had missed sensual enjoyments by untimely sleep.  The expression that “I slept in bliss” signifies only that no misery was felt.  Moreover the opposite representation of the deep sleep state is also found when a man on rising from sleep says “I slept so long without knowing anything not even my own self.”  The self is not atomic, since we can simultaneously feel a sensation in the head as well as in the leg.  The Jaina theory that it is of the size of the body which contracts and expands according to the body it occupies is unacceptable.  It is better therefore that the soul should be regarded as all-pervading as described in the Vedas.  This self must also be different in different persons for otherwise their individual experiences of objects and of pleasure and pain cannot be explained [Footnote ref 1]. ____________________________________________________
_______________

[Footnote 1:  See S’lokavarttika, atmavada S’astra-dipika, atmavada and mok@savada.]

402

Kumarila considered the self to be merely the potency of knowledge (jnanas’akti) [Footnote ref 1].  Cognitions of things were generated by the activity of the manas and the other senses.  This self itself can only be cognized by mental perception, Or at the time of salvation there being none of the senses nor the manas the self remains in pure existence as the potency of knowledge without any actual expression or manifestation.  So the state of salvation is the state in which the self remains devoid of any of its characteristic qualities such as pleasure, pain, knowledge, willing, etc., for the self itself is not knowledge nor is it bliss or ananda as Vedanta supposes; but these are generated in it by its energy and the operation of the senses.  The self being divested of all its senses at that time, remains as a mere potency of the energy of knowledge, a mere existence.  This view of salvation is accepted in the main by Prabhakara also.