法華義疏 8.51

8.51

「而諸草木各有差別」者，第八、明所生差別譬。前三譬論昔教已竟，昔教雖多不出三種：初雙、明能稟，次雙、明所稟，後雙、明正稟。今此兩譬論能生是同、所生有異，即是至理無二，於緣得益不同。所以論同異者，為欲破今昔二病、稱嘆二人。破今昔二病者，昔五乘人正執教異、不知理同，稟今一乘教人偏執理同、不知教異，為破此二人，故明理雖同不失教異，雖五乘教異而至理常同，是以文云「雖一地所生一雨所潤而諸草木各有差別」。又破二病者，昔五乘人不知於理未甞二，不知於緣未甞一，為破此病故說於地雨未甞異、草木未甞一。今稟一乘教人雖知至理未甞異，不知於緣未甞一，為破此病故說於地雨未甞異、草木未甞一也。稱嘆二人者，一、歎佛能知同異；二、歎迦葉能知同異。能知同者，謂理一也；能知異者，謂教異也。又能知同者，於理無異也；能知異者，於緣成異也。

As for "yet the various grasses and trees each have their distinctions," this is the eighth [part], explaining the parable of the distinctions among what is produced. The previous three parables, in discussing the past teachings, have already concluded. Although the past teachings were manifold, they do not exceed three kinds: the first pair explained that which can receive; the next pair explained that which is received; the last pair explained the actual reception. Now, these two parables discuss that that which can produce is identical while what is produced is different; that is, the ultimate principle is non-dual, while in terms of conditions, the benefits obtained differ. The reason for discussing sameness and difference is to break the two errors of past and present and to praise the two persons. Breaking the two errors of past and present means: in the past, persons of the five vehicles clung precisely to the difference of teachings and did not know the identity of principle; those who receive the present ekayāna teaching cling exclusively to the identity of principle and do not know the difference of teachings. In order to break [the errors of] these two persons, it therefore explains that although the principle is identical, it does not lose the difference of teachings, and although the teachings of the five vehicles differ, the ultimate principle is ever identical. Thus the text says, "Although produced by one earth and moistened by one rain, yet the various grasses and trees each have their distinctions." Furthermore, breaking two errors means: in the past, persons of the five vehicles did not know that in terms of principle it has never been dual, and did not know that in terms of conditions it has never been one; in order to break this error, it is therefore said that in terms of the earth and rain they have never differed, and in terms of grasses and trees they have never been one. Now, those who receive the ekayāna teaching, although knowing that the ultimate principle has never differed, do not know that in terms of conditions it has never been one; in order to break this error, it is therefore said that in terms of the earth and rain they have never differed, and in terms of grasses and trees they have never been one. Praising two persons means: first, praising the Buddha's ability to know sameness and difference; second, praising Kāśyapa's ability to know sameness and difference. Being able to know sameness means the oneness of principle; being able to know difference means the distinction of teachings. Furthermore, being able to know sameness means there is no difference in principle; being able to know difference means difference is established in terms of conditions.