Completely eliminates cyclic life,
Then why do the perfect buddhas
Not teach the beginning of such [cyclic life]?
If addictions are eliminated by intuitive wisdom, actions would [also] be eliminated and, because of the absence of these causes and conditions, there would be an interruption of the continuum of intrinsically indentifiable form, and so forth, which has continued from one birth and death to another, immersed in cyclic life from beginningless time. Then in that case, since the perfect buddhas have not spoken of a beginning, one would have to identitfy something like an ultimate beginning of the continuum of one's aggregates, along with [some rationale like] "For reasons such as this, the victors do not define its beginning."
If you claim that the Victor did not say so because he did not know, or for some other reason, then here, since the Lord Buddha is accepted as being omniscient, it is impossible that he does not know. And as for saying that he did not state it for some other reason, that is also incorrect. For example, if you say that he didn't say so because it is beginningless, like a wheel of a chain of water buckets and there would also be no end. Such could also be said about any other examples, such as a wheel.
By explaining "[the continuum] comes to an end," if you claim that there is an end [to your continuum], it would follow that the Lord Buddha did not know that. Since it is impossible for him to not know that, you would have to show [a reference to support] such an end (*). Even if you can't show anything, if you adhere to this [line of] reasoning, then [such a reference] remains indispensable.
Yuktishashtika de Nagarjuna et Yuktishashtikavritti de Chandrakirti (Nagarjuna's Reason Sixty with Chandrakirti's Commentary, Joseph Loizzo).
______________
(* Malgré le tibétain "tha.ma.yod.pa.", le texte anglais dit "beginning").
