Knowledge in Sadra’ philosophy, is merely presence of something near Percipient. The most perfect sense of “ presence” under this school, is intuitive knowledge of human being about “ self” within which knowing and known have unity. Hence, From Sadra’ s view, “ knowledge” of “ self” has a very high rank position in philosophy. However, what is described as " intuitive knowledge to self" in transcendental wisdom, From Kant’ s view is not intuitive knowledge; but this knowledge is also a kind of our empirical knowledge where is obtained through mediation of “ subjective form” which is called “ appearance” by Kant. But Kant believes that other than this “ empirical ego” assigned to “ transcendental ego” He believes that it cannot, as Nomenon, be placed in the center of the human experiential vision. Therefor, he neither believes knowledge of self as an acquired knowledge nor as intuitive one. In this article, we explains this problem of why Mulla Sadra considers intuitive cognition of self. This problem is embedded within a more general problem: Whether that ego which comprehends itself belongs to knowledge? In this paper, we will show that the “ knowledge” of “ self” , unlike Kant's conception, cannot be explained except by the existential attitude, because intuitive perception is a kind of presence in existence and for existence.