俱舍論疏 5.259

5.259

論「又若有執至而不應許」，破異計也。若名與所詮義俱時而生，由如生相與義俱生者，即有三過：一名在現在，義在過、未；二子名與子俱生，父母不合隨意立名；三無為無生，應無有名。

On the Śāstra's statement: "Furthermore, if one grasps that [...] it should not be accepted": Refuting an alternative position. If a name arose simultaneously with the expressed meaning, just as the mark of arising arises simultaneously with the entity, there would be three faults: first, the name would be in the present, while the meaning would be in the past or future; second, a child's name would arise simultaneously with the child, and parents would not be able to name [the child] arbitrarily; third, the unconditioned is unarisen, and so it would have no name.