Nature of Cause

Nyaya-Vaisheshika categories (Study)

by Diptimani Goswami | 2014 | 61,072 words

This page relates 鈥楴ature of Cause鈥� of the study on the Nyaya-Vaisheshika categories with special reference to the Tarkasangraha by Annambhatta. Both Nyaya and Vaisesika are schools of ancient Indian Philosophy, and accepted in their system various padarthas or objects of valid knowledge. This study investigates how the Tarkasamgraha reflects these categories in the combined Nyayavaisesika school.

Go directly to: Footnotes.

Nature of Cause

< Previous

Next >

This 狈测腻测补-痴补颈艣别峁办补蝉 system defines a cause as that which is an unconditional and invariable antecedent of an effect and an effect as that which is an unconditional and invariable consequent of cause. In 狈测腻测补办耻蝉耻尘腻帽箩补濒墨, Udayana has stated that cause is an invariable antecedent of an effect.^[1]

痴颈艣惫补苍腻迟丑补狈测腻测补笔补帽肠腻苍补苍补 defines cause in his 叠丑腻峁Ｄ乸补谤颈肠肠丑别诲补 as,

鈥淐ausality is the invariable antecedence of what is not superfluity.鈥�^[2]

艢颈惫腻诲颈迟测补鈥檚 厂补辫迟补辫补诲腻谤迟丑墨 points out that a cause is that which produces an effect.^[3]

There is some similarity between the 狈测腻测补-痴补颈艣别峁办补 view of cause and the western view of cause,

鈥淗ume defines a cause as an invariable antecedent. J.S. Mill defines it as an unconditional and invariable antecedent.鈥�^[4]

Other 狈补颈测腻测颈办补蝉 and 痴补颈艣别峁办补蝉 give similar definition of cause.

Now these definitions of cause depend on the conceptions of the effect. Hence it is necessary to define effect before going to explain the definition of cause. An effect is defined by 艢iv膩ditya as that which has a prior non-existence.^[5] It means, an effect does not pre-exist in its cause, i.e.it was non-existent before production. An effect destroys its prior non-existence when it comes into being. A counter-correlative of an antecedent non-existence is what subsequently comes into existence. For example, a jar or a cloth is the counter entity of the prior non-existences of jar or cloth. This definition of effect directly reflects the theory of causation of the 狈测腻测补痴补颈艣别峁办补 which is known as 补蝉补迟办腻谤测补惫腻诲补.

The opinion of 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补 about causation is not different from the general view of the 狈测腻测补-痴补颈艣别峁办补 system. 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补 defines cause, as that which invariably (niyata) precedes (辫奴谤惫补惫峁泃迟颈) the effect (办腻谤测补).^[6] A cause must be antecedent of its effect, otherwise it will not be a cause. 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补 remarks in his commentary, 顿墨辫颈办腻 that 辫奴谤惫补惫峁泃迟颈 is inserted in the definition to exclude 办腻谤测补 itself.^[7]

As the definition of cause depends on the understanding of the concept of effect, so 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补 proceeds to define effect first. He says that the effect is the counter-correlative of its own antecedent non-existence.^[8] Govardhana 惭颈艣谤补 clearly states that before the production of an effect which is not existent in the cause that is its antecedent negation.^[9] So, according to 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补 effect has a beginning and is not eternal. 笔谤腻驳补产丑腻惫补 is not an effect as it has no beginning but an end. Therefore, an effect is stated as the pratiyogi of 辫谤腻驳补产丑腻惫补.

The definition of cause mentioned above refers to three essential characteristics of a cause. Firstly, it must be an antecedent of the effect (辫奴谤惫补惫峁泃迟颈). Secondly, it is invariable, it must invariably precede the effect (niyata辫奴谤惫补惫峁泃迟颈), and the last is its unconditionality or necessity, it must unconditionally precede the effect (补苍补苍测补迟丑腻蝉颈诲诲丑补).

Now, the first condition of antecedence means that it is an immediate antecedent and not a remote one. Otherwise threads of yesterday will also produce cloth today. This also implies that the cause must abide in the substance in which the effect is produced, at the moment immediately preceding that of its origin.^[10]

Again all precedent things cannot be necessarily the cause. For example, the potter鈥檚 ass which carries the earth required for making the pot, is antecedent of the pot but it does not invariably precede it, because earth can be brought in other way also. In that case pot can be made without the help of ass. So, the word niyata is added to exclude all things which are not invariably precedent.^[11]

However, this definition of cause stated by 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补 appears to be deficient as it does not take care of all the condition of causality 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补 was also aware of this deficiency and as such he makes amendment for this in the 顿墨辫颈办腻. He adds another adjective 补苍补苍测补迟丑腻蝉颈诲诲丑补tve sati which means 鈥減rovided the antecedent thing is not a superfluity.鈥�^[12] The adjective 补苍补苍测补迟丑腻蝉颈诲诲丑补 is added to the definition because sometimes a non-cause also may be an invariable antecedent of the effect. But whatever is not strictly necessary to explain a phenomenon is a superfluity (补苍补苍测补迟丑腻蝉颈诲诲丑补). For example the colour of the thread does not contribute to the production of the cloth. Hence, it is 补苍测补迟丑腻蝉颈诲诲丑补 in respect of the cloth. Similarly the father of the potter is invariably antecedent of the pot, without him the potter cannot be born and without the potter, the pot. But the potter鈥檚 father or all his ancestors cannot be regarded as the causes of the pot. Because, a cause is not a remote antecedent of its effect but its immediate antecedent, potter鈥檚 father is the antecedent of the pot only by virtue of his being the father of the potter, the real cause. Therefore, to exclude these things the word 补苍补苍测补迟丑腻蝉颈诲诲丑补 is added in the definition. This word, 补苍补苍测补迟丑腻蝉颈诲诲丑补 excludes all these things which are not immediately connected with the effect though invariably antecedent. The ass, the potter鈥檚 father, all his ancestors, the colour of the rod etc. are excluded through this word.

In the 痴腻办测补惫峁泃迟颈, a commentary of 罢补谤办补蝉补峁僩谤补丑补 it is stated that the complete definition of cause is:

鈥�niyat膩峁噛ath膩siddhabhinnatve sati k膩ry膩vyavahitap奴rvak峁n膩vacchinnak膩ra峁嘺de艣anir奴pit膩dheyat膩vaddh膩vapratiyo-gitanavacchedakadharmavat k膩ra峁嘺m.鈥�^[13]

To complete the definition of cause the word 补苍补苍测补迟丑腻蝉颈诲诲丑补 is essential. 罢补谤办补蝉补峁僩谤补丑补 has not mentioned this word. 础苍苍补峁僢丑补峁弓补 adds this adjective in his commentary 顿墨辫颈办腻 only. 痴腻办测补惫峁泃迟颈 and 厂颈诲诲丑腻苍迟补肠补苍诲谤辞诲补测补, the commentaries of 罢补谤办补蝉补峁僩谤补丑补 use the word 补苍补苍测补迟丑腻蝉颈诲诲丑补 as the part of the definition. Gobardhana 惭颈艣谤补 in his 狈测腻测补bodhin墨-迟墨办腻 remarks that the word 补苍补苍测补迟丑腻蝉颈诲诲丑补 should have been stated in the definition.^[14]