成唯識論掌中樞要 2.238

2.238

唯識之中但有二對，何故不說前二以為虛妄？無漏有為，非虛妄故。何故不說前二以為世俗對勝義？如說二勝義中，初亦名俗故。今據有體名世俗，彼無體故。理實亦有，准二諦故。此中實性唯取真如，但有常、無常門，不說漏、無漏門者，無漏有為非實性故。

Within vijñapti-mātra there are only two pairs; why does it not speak of the first two as deceptive? Because conditioned anāsrava is not deceptive. Why does it not speak of the first two as conventional as opposed to ultimate? Just as it is said that among the two ultimates, the first is also named conventional. Here it designates something as conventional based on having an essence, whereas that lacks an essence. In principle and in reality it also exists, by analogy with the two truths. Here 'real nature' takes only suchness; it only has the approaches of permanence and impermanence, and does not speak of the approaches of sāsrava and anāsrava, because conditioned anāsrava is not the real nature.