俱舍論記 20.27

20.27

「此四種說至外道朋中」者，此下釋後兩句。將印世友，先破餘三，此即破第一師。此四種說一切有部中，第一執法有轉變故，應置數論外道朋中，同彼計故。又《婆沙》七十七云「說類異者，離法自性說何為類？故亦非理。諸有為法從未來世至現在時，前類應滅。從現在世至過去時，後類應生。過去有生、未來有滅，豈應正理？」

Regarding "Among these four explanations ... should be placed among the ranks of non-Buddhist outsiders": below explains the latter two lines. About to endorse Vasumitra, he first refutes the other three; this is the refutation of the first master. Among these four types of Sarvāstivāda doctrines, the first posits the transformation (pariṇāma) of dharmas, and therefore should be placed among the ranks of the Sāṃkhya non-Buddhist outsiders, because it agrees with their doctrine. Furthermore, *Mahāvibhāṣā* fascicle 77 states: "Regarding the statement of difference in modality (bhāva): apart from the intrinsic nature of the dharma, what can be spoken of as modality? Therefore it is also illogical. When conditioned dharmas come from the future period to the present, the previous modality should cease. When going from the present period to the past, the subsequent modality should arise. That the past would have arising and the future would have cessation—how could that be correct reason?"