俱舍論頌疏論本 20.24

20.24

無異者，有宗救也。用不離體，名為無異。既用即體，體既無無窮之過故，用亦無無窮之失也。世便壞者，破也，此經部重破。若言無異，三世便壞，體既恒有，用亦應然，何得有時名為過、未？故彼所執世義破壞。

As for "Without difference": this is the Sarvāstivāda rescue. Function is not separate from the entity, which is termed "without difference". Since function is the entity itself, and since the entity does not have the fault of an infinite regress, function also does not have the defect of an infinite regress. As for "the time-periods are ruined": this is a refutation; here the Sautrāntika refutes again. If you say they are without difference, the three time-periods are then ruined: since the entity is constant, the function should also be so; how could it at certain times be called past or future? Therefore, their posited meaning of the time-periods is refuted and ruined.