成唯識論述記 2.391

2.391

述曰：生法名有，未來既無，如何有生在彼無世？現在既是有，過去名為無。滅體令法無，應非是現在故，應滅相在過去世；薩婆多說在現在故，彼復救言：誰言滅相其體是無，令成過去？

The Commentary states: The phenomenon of birth is called existent; since the future is already non-existent, how can there be birth in that non-existent time? The present is already existent; the past is called non-existent. The substance of destruction causes a phenomenon to be non-existent; it should not be in the present, and therefore the mark of destruction should be in the past time. Because the Sarvāstivādin says it is in the present, they again rescue: 'Who says the substance of the mark of destruction is non-existent, making it past?'