首楞嚴義疏注經 1.348

1.348

轉救也。若如前難，令見面等，理恐不然，以心能鑒覺，但名為知；眼有照明，方稱曰見。若將心知為眼見者，必無此理，故云非義。

This is the alternative defense. If it were as in the earlier difficulty, requiring seeing the face and so forth, that would probably be unreasonable, because the mind's ability to discern and be aware is merely called 'knowing'; only when the eye has illumination is it called 'seeing.' If one takes the mind's knowing to be the eye's seeing, there can be no such principle; hence he says 'it is incorrect.'