瑜伽論記 14.383

14.383

今大乘等破云：汝立滅相，若有因後應更滅（宗），以有因故（因），猶如生相（喻）。又立量成立滅不由因（宗），後不滅故（因），猶如虛空（喻），本比量也。亦即更破云：汝有因之滅應非是滅（宗），以有因故等是有為故（因），猶如生相（喻）。若爾汝以有為故，因乃與有法自相相違也。

Now the Mahāyāna and others refute them, saying: 'The characteristic of cessation posited by you, if it has a cause, should cease further later on (thesis), because it has a cause (reason), just like the characteristic of arising (example).' Furthermore, formulating an inference to establish that cessation is not due to a cause (thesis), because it does not cease later (reason), just like empty space (example)—this is the original inference. They also further refute them, saying: 'The cessation with a cause posited by you should not be cessation (thesis), because it has a cause, etc., and because it is conditioned (reason), just like the characteristic of arising (example).' If so, through your [reason] 'because it is conditioned', the reason contradicts the essential nature of the subject.