Following Bhartrhari who claims that any knowledge is intertwined with the word, Utpaladeva and Abhinavagupta maintain that light (prakasa) or knowledge (jñana), the essence of the Lord, consists in reflective awareness (vimarsa), which is essentially associated with verbalization (abhilapa). According to Abhinavagupta, this view that any knowledge is intertwined with the word is accepted by Dharmottara, an adhyavasayapeksapramanyavadin or one who holds that direct perception, followed by determination (adhyavasaya), becomes a valid means of knowledge (pramana); the determination consists in verbalization. For the Pratyabhijña school, to be a conceptual cognition means to be a reflective awareness, without which light would be no different from an unconscious reflector of images such as a crystal (IPK 1.5.11); direct perception as conceived by the Buddhist epistemologists, which is distinguished from a conceptual cognition, cannot be a cognition. But a difficulty arises. If it were the case that reflective awareness is interpenetrated with the word, the Pratyabhijña school would have to accept that even the Lord, which is pure consciousness, is connected with conceptual construction (vikalpa), which is impure. This difficulty is cleared up as follows. The reflective awareness ‘I’ of the Lord does not consist in conceptual construction even if it is associated with the word, since the word is the supreme word (pares vac). Moreover, the Lord cannot not be connected with conceptual construction. For, in conceptual construction, there are always what is to be determined (niscetavya), and what is to be excluded (apohitavya); and the Lord, which is not limited by anything, cannot have its counterentity (pratiyogin).