維摩經略疏 7.95

7.95

「唯舍利弗至眾求」，二、約三寶呵。所以須約三寶呵者，其聲聞人隨聞生解三空入道，由佛說法得入僧數。若呵其非者，是則過由佛法眾僧亦非，故呵其不應取著不了義教，明三十二相為佛，九部為法，羯磨得戒為事僧、見諦得果為理僧。大乘諸法實相本自明了是佛、理性無倒為法、智理不二為僧。又知法名佛、離相為法、無為即僧。若不識此一體三寶，乃著別相三寶，故呵不應著也。

From "Only, Śāriputra" up to "the assembly seeks," second, is the rebuke with reference to the Three Jewels. Why it is necessary to rebuke him with reference to the Three Jewels: those Śrāvakas gave rise to understanding following what they heard, entered the path through the three emptinesses, and were able to enter the number of the Saṅgha because the Buddha expounded the Dharma. If [Vimalakīrti] rebuked his error, then this fault would stem from the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Saṅgha being likewise mistaken; therefore, he rebukes him for not being supposed to cling to the implicit teachings, which explain the thirty-two marks as the Buddha, the nine divisions as the Dharma, the attainment of the precepts through formal acts (karman) as the phenomenal Saṅgha, and the realization of the fruit by seeing the truths as the noumenal Saṅgha. In the Mahāyāna, the intrinsically radiant true reality of all dharmas is the Buddha, the non-delusiveness of the noumenal nature is the Dharma, and the non-duality of wisdom and principle is the Saṅgha. Furthermore, knowing dharmas is called the Buddha, freedom from marks is the Dharma, and the unconditioned is precisely the Saṅgha. If one does not recognize this single-essence Three Jewels, but instead clings to the distinct Three Jewels, therefore he rebukes him that he should not cling.