高僧傳 11.131

11.131

而謬執之徒，互生異論。偏於律者，則言戒律為指事，數論虛誕。薄知篇聚名目，便言解及波離。止能漉水翻囊，已謂行齊羅漢，唯我曰僧。餘皆目想。此則自讚毀他，功不贖過。我慢矜高，蓋斯謂也。偏於數論者，則言律部為偏分，數論為通方。於是扈背毘尼，專重陰入，得意便行，曾莫拘礙。謂言地獄不燒智人，鑊湯不煮般若。此皆操之失柄，還以自傷。相鼠看羊，豈非斯謂？

Yet adherents of erroneous clinging bring forth conflicting theories among themselves. Those partial to the vinaya say that the precepts deal with concrete matters, while the abhidharma is vain and unfounded. With only a slight acquaintance with the categories of offenses, they straightaway claim their understanding equals that of Upāli; merely able to strain water and invert their filter bags, they already consider their conduct on par with an arhat, claiming, 'Only we are monks; the rest are mere figments.' This is praising oneself and reviling others: their merits do not redeem their faults. When people speak of haughty self-conceit, this is surely what is meant. Those partial to the abhidharma say that the vinaya division is merely a limited branch, while the abhidharma is universally comprehensive. Thereupon they turn their backs on the vinaya and exclusively value the aggregates and sense bases; indulging their impulses, they act without the slightest restraint, claiming, 'The hells do not burn the wise; the boiling cauldrons do not cook prajñā.' These are all cases of mismanaging the handle of the tool, turning it back to injure oneself. When people speak of 'looking at a rat' or 'watching a sheep', does this not apply here?