365bet

A History of Indian Philosophy Volume 1

by Surendranath Dasgupta | 1922 | 212,082 words | ISBN-13: 9788120804081

This page describes the philosophy of causation as satkaryavada: a concept having historical value dating from ancient India. This is the seventeenth part in the series called the “the kapila and the patanjala samkhya (yoga)�, originally composed by Surendranath Dasgupta in the early 20th century.

Go directly to: Footnotes.

Part 17 - Causation as Satⲹvāda

The theory that the effect potentially exists before it is generated by the movement of the cause

The above consideration brings us to an important aspect of the ṃkⲹ view of causation as ٰⲹ岹. ṃkⲹ holds that there can be no production of a thing previously non-existent; causation means the appearance or manifestation of a quality due to certain changes of collocations in the causes which were already held in them in a potential form. Production of effect only means an internal change of the arrangement of atoms in the cause, and this exists in it in a potential form, and just a little loosening of the barrier which was standing in the way of the happening of such a change of arrangement will produce the desired new collocation—the effect. This doctrine is called ٰⲹ岹, i.e. that the or effect is sat or existent even before the causal operation to produce the effect was launched. The oil exists in the sesamum, the statue in the stone, the curd in the milk. The causal operation () only renders that manifest (屹ūٲ) which was formerly in an unmanifested condition (tirohita)[1].

The Buddhists also believed in change, as much as ṃkⲹ did, but with them there was no background to the change; every change was thus absolutely a new one, and when it was past, the next moment the change was lost absolutely. There were only the passing dharmas or manifestations of forms and qualities, but there was no permanent underlying dharma or substance. ṃkⲹ also holds in the continual change of dharmas, but it also holds that these dharmas represent only the conditions of the permanent reals. The conditions and collocations of the reals change constantly, but the reals themselves are unchangeable. The effect according to the Buddhists was non-existent, it came into being for a moment and was lost. On account of this theory of causation and also on account of their doctrine of śūԲⲹ, they were called ś첹 (nihilists) by the Vedāntins. This doctrine is therefore contrasted to ṃkⲹ doctrine as aٰⲹ岹. The Jain view holds that both these views are relatively true and that from one point of view satⲹvāda is true and from another aٰⲹ岹. The ṃkⲹ view that the cause is continually transforming itself into its effects is technically called 貹ṇām岹 as against the ձԳٲ view called the ٳٲ岹; that cause remains ever the same, and what we call effects are but illusory impositions of mere unreal appearance of name and form —mere [2].

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

ղٳٱ첹ܻܳī, 9.

[2]:

Both the ձԳٲ and the ṃkⲹ theories of causation are sometimes loosely called ٰⲹ岹. But correctly speaking as some discerning commentators have pointed out, the ձԳٲ theory of causation should be called satkāranavāda for according to it the ṇa (cause) alone exists (sat) and all (effects) are illusory appearances of the kārana; but according to ṃkⲹ the kāryya exists in a potential state in the kārana and is hence always existing and real.

Let's grow together!

I humbly request your help to keep doing what I do best: provide the world with unbiased sources, definitions and images. Your donation direclty influences the quality and quantity of knowledge, wisdom and spiritual insight the world is exposed to.

Let's make the world a better place together!

Like what you read? Help to become even better: