俱舍論疏 6.218

6.218

論「如是所執至未滅無故」，論主破也。既是無為，豈得先無後有？

[When] the treatise [states]: "What is held in this way ... because prior to cessation it is non-existent," the author of the treatise refutes them: "Since it is unconditioned, how could it be non-existent previously and existent later?"