唯識二十論述記 2.243

2.243

述曰：於見道中，得此所說無分別智；後有緣世間無漏之智，現在前位，方能稱理如實了知彼生死識境非實有，即後得智。緣世間故，名為「世間」，非體有漏，名「世間」也；體非是漏，立以「淨」名。稱境而知，名如實知；前無分別，唯緣如理，但名真覺。此後得智，遍緣世間，能知境無，名如實知，亦名真覺。此智得起，藉無分別，無分別智，獨名真覺。若生死識，雖少自知，不名真覺。無分別智，雖名真覺，不能知境皆非實有，此後得智，遍緣理事，能知境無，異前二智，其義與前知世眠夢，平等無二。前處眠夢得世覺時，知先夢境體非實有，今從生死得於真智出世覺時，知先生死夢境體非真實，相似無二。平等、相似，一義二名。解頌如字故。若不知生死夢境非實有，但是未覺，得真覺已，故能了知。《攝大乘論》、《成唯識》中皆有此釋，義意既同，故不繁引。

Commentary: In the path of seeing, one attains this aforementioned non-conceptual knowledge; later, when undefiled knowledge that takes the mundane as its object is present before one, only then can it accord with principle and understand as it truly is that the objects of that consciousness of saṃsāra are not real; this is precisely the subsequently attained knowledge. Because it takes the mundane as its object, it is called 'mundane', not because its essence is defiled; because its essence is not defiled, it is designated as 'pure'. Knowing in accordance with the object is called 'knowing as it truly is'; the previous non-conceptual [knowledge] solely takes the principle of suchness as its object, so it is merely called true awakening. This subsequently attained knowledge universally takes the mundane as its object and can know that objects are non-existent; hence it is called 'knowing as it truly is', and also called 'true awakening'. For this knowledge to arise, it depends on non-conceptual [knowledge], and non-conceptual knowledge alone is called true awakening. As for the consciousness of saṃsāra, although it slightly knows itself, it is not called true awakening. Although non-conceptual knowledge is called true awakening, it cannot know that objects are all not real; this subsequently attained knowledge universally takes both principle and phenomena as its object and can know that objects are non-existent. Being distinct from the preceding two knowledges, its principle is equivalent and not different from previously knowing the mundane sleep-dream. When previously, in the midst of a sleep-dream, one attains mundane awakening, one knows that the essence of the previous dream objects was not real; now, emerging from saṃsāra and attaining supramundane awakening through true knowledge, one knows that the essence of the previous dream objects of saṃsāra was not real—the two are similar and not different. 'Equivalent' and 'similar' are two names for one meaning, because they explain the word 'like' (yathā) in the verse. If one does not know that the dream objects of saṃsāra are not real, one is merely not yet awakened; once one has attained true awakening, one can know it. Both the Mahāyānasaṃgraha and the Cheng weishi lun contain this explanation, and since their intended meaning is the same, I will not cite them redundantly.