Can Effect Arise Simulteneously With Its Cause - Dhamma Wheel

Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?
- Dhamma Wheel
Dhamma Wheel
A Buddhist discussion forum on the Dhamma of the

Theravada
Search
Search
FAQ
Register
Login
Board index Modern Theravda General Theravda discussion

Forum rules
Post Reply
21 posts
Search this topic
1
2
Search

by Alex123 Sat Jun 26, 2010 4:46 pm
P
o
Hello
all,
s
t
Alex123
Posts: 3364
Joined: Wed Mar 10,
2010 11:32 pm
Can cause and its result occur simultaneously? How can this be? Any examples? I can understand
and see how there can be two mutual causes (example 2 cards supporting each other so they
don't fall). But it seems hard to reconcile how two things arise together at the same time with
one being cause and other the result.
Ex: contact and feeling. Do they arise at the same time? According to Theravadin abhidhamma
yes. But feeling doesn't cause contact, contact is the cause of feeling, right?. How can effect
arise simulteneously together with its cause at exactly the same time? Shouldn't it come (even
a nanosecond) later?
With metta,
Alex
"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to
break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack
you back down with ruthless indifference..."
o
p
Re: Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?

by beeblebrox Sat Jun 26, 2010 5:21 pm
P
o
When
I was younger (maybe 10 years ago),
s
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=4793&p=74083[25/8/2558 5:50:04]
I had this idea that the separation between cause
Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause? - Dhamma Wheel
and effect was an illusion... they're actually one thing, split up by our perception.
This was based on the idea of non-duality. Right now... I think it's a bit silly.
another viewpoint that doesn't really contribute to anything.
It's just yet
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009
10:41 pm
o
p

by OcTavO Sat Jun 26, 2010 5:25 pm
P
o related to Theravada Buddhism, but
Not
s
t
possibly of interest to you on this topic: Retrocausality
OcTavO
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009
3:27 am
o
p

by smokey Sat Jun 26, 2010 5:37 pm
P
o
Cuase
and effect are a transformation
s
same
thing.
t
from one thing to another, but it actually remains the
smokey
Posts: 115
Joined: Mon Jun 22,
2009 6:01 pm
Location: Budaevo,
Croatia
o
p

by Goofaholix Sat Jun 26, 2010 8:23 pm
P
o
I don't
see how that's possible by definition, but I guess the difference could
s
Itt might seem that way when the two exist at the same time for a while, or
be a split second.
when the affect
passes away before the cause.

Goofaholix
Posts: 2273
Joined: Sun Nov 15,
2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand
"Right effort is effort with wisdom. Because where there is wisdom, there is interest. The desire to know something is
wisdom at work. Being mindful is not difficult. But its difficult to be continuously aware. For that you need right effort. But
it does not require a great deal of energy. Its relaxed perseverance in reminding yourself to be aware. When you are
aware, wisdom unfolds naturally, and there is still more interest." - Sayadaw U Tejaniya
o
p

by cooran Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:02 pm
P
o
Hello
all,
My understanding is that the Buddha never taught that there was on cause and one effect. He
taught conditionality.
cooran
Posts: 8183
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009
11:32 pm
Location: Queensland,
Australia
"Freedom of the Will" in the light of Theravada Buddhist teachings

Journal of Buddhist Ethics, Annual, 2007 by Peter Harvey
Excerpt:
Unlike the theory of linear causality--which led the Vedists and Jains to see the relationship
between an act and its result as predictable and tit-for-tat--the principle of this/that
conditionality makes that relationship inherently complex. The results of kamma experienced
at any one point in time come not only from past kamma, but also from present kamma. This
means that, although there are general patterns relating habitual acts to corresponding results
([section]9 [M. III.203-206]), there is no set one-for-one, tit-for-tat, relationship between a
particular action and its results. Instead, the results are determined by the context of the act,
both in terms of actions that preceded or followed it ([section] 11 [M.III.209-215; e.g., a bad
action may not be immediately followed by a bad rebirth if one has done strong good actions
beforehand, or develops right view near death]) and in terms one's state of mind at the time of
acting or experiencing the result ([section] 13 [=A.I.249-253]). As we noted in the Introduction,
the feedback loops inherent in this/that conditionality mean that the working out of any
particular cause-effect relationship can be very complex indeed. This explains why the Buddha
says in [section] 12 [A.II.80] that the results of kamma are imponderable. Only a person who
has developed the mental range of a Buddha--another imponderable itself--would be able to
trace the intricacies of the kammic network. The basic premise of kamma is simple--that
skillful intentions lead to favorable results, and unskillful ones to unfavorable results--but the
process by which those results work themselves out is so intricate that it cannot be fully
mapped.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_7 ... 265/pg_13/
with metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time-----Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe-----It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it --o
p
Re: Can effect arise simultaneously with its cause?

by acinteyyo Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:07 pm
P
o
s
Goofaholix wrote:
t
I don't see how that's possible by definition, [...]
The only interrelation between cause and effect don't have to be necessarily time, the relation
between them can also be a logical one.
acinteyyo
Posts: 1356
Joined: Mon Jun 01,
2009 9:48 am
Location: Bavaria /
Germany
In my eyes dependent origination (paticcasamuppda) is an example for cause and effect

arising simultaneously.
Action (kamma) and its results (vipka) is an example for cause and effect arising successively.
best wishes, acinteyyo
Pubbe cha bhikkhave, etarahi ca dukkhaceva papemi, dukkhassa ca nirodha. (M 22)

o
p

by Alex123 Sat Jun 26, 2010 11:32 pm
P
o
s
acinteyyo wrote:
t
Goofaholix wrote:
Alex123
Posts: 3364
Joined: Wed Mar 10,
2010 11:32 pm
I don't see how that's possible by definition, [...]

The only interrelation between cause and effect don't have to be necessarily time, the relation
between them can also be a logical one.
In my eyes dependent origination (paticcasamuppda) is an example for cause and effect arising
simultaneously.
Action (kamma) and its results (vipka) is an example for cause and effect arising successively.
Wow. Acinteyyo, how can result arise together (at exactly the same time) with its cause? Does
it negate the meaning of the cause as something that has to precede (even by a nanosecond)
its effect?
In the case of paticcasamuppda there are moments where time plays a role. Ex: how can birth
arise at the same time as aging&death?
"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to
break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack
you back down with ruthless indifference..."
o
p

by cooran Sun Jun 27, 2010 9:08 am
P
o
Hello
all,
s
t
cooran
Posts: 8183
11:32 pm
Australia
Nina's answer on dsg:

================================================================
Re: [dsg] Can cause and its result arise together at exactly the same time?
Dear Alex,
Op 26-jun-2010, om 18:43 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven:
> Can cause and its result occur simultaneously? How can this be? Any
> examples? I can understand and see how there can be two mutual
> causes (example 2 cards supporting each other so they don't fall).
> But it seems hard to reconcile how two things arise together at the
> same time with one being cause and other the result.
------N: No, kamma and vipaaka could not arise together.
-------->
> A: Ex: contact and feeling. Do they arise at the same time?
> According to Theravadin abhidhamma yes. But feeling doesn't cause

> contact, contact is the cause of feeling. How can effect arise
> together with its cause? Shouldn't it come (even a nanosecond) later?
-----N: Here we have to distinguish cause that produces vipaaka and a
factor that is a condition for another reality. Contact does not
produce feeling, it is a condition in several ways for the conascent
feeling.
Vis. Ch XVII, 231: Text Vis. 231: Herein, in the five doors contact
beginning with eye-contact is a
condition in eight ways, as conascence, mutuality, support, result,
nutriment, association, presence, and non-disappearance conditions, for
the five kinds of feeling that have respectively eye sensitivity, etc.,
as their physical basis.
-------N: Eye-contact accompanies seeing-consciousness. This contact
conditions the feeling accompanying seeing-consciousness by way of
conascence and other conditions that are conascent. It is the same
for the other sense-contacts. Nutriment-condition is mentioned,
because contact is a mental nutriment for the other conascent dhammas
including feeling. Contact as a mental nutriment supports the
prolongation of the cycle of birth and death.
Eye-contact contacts visible object so that seeing and the other
cetasikas, including feeling, can experience that object. The
vipaakacittas that arise in the same process after seeing has fallen
away, still experience visible object. The accompanying feelings are
strongly dependent on eye-contact and it is the same in the case of
the other sense-door processes. The cittas in a sense-door process
succeed one another extremely rapidly. They all experience the same
sense object and are dependent on the same sense-door which has not
fallen away yet.
----------Nina.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastu ... age/108140
===============================================================
with metta
Chris
p

by acinteyyo Sun Jun 27, 2010 9:21 am
P
HioAlex123,
s
t
Alex123 wrote:
Wow. Acinteyyo, how can result arise together (at exactly the same time) with its cause?
It depends on the interrelation of cause and effect. You seem to be concernd only with
acinteyyo
Posts: 1356
Joined: Mon Jun 01,
2009 9:48 am
Location: Bavaria /
Germany
temporal interrelation. In that case the results obviously have to arise after its cause. There
are cases where the cause determines a result logically, where time doesn't play any role at all
concerning their interrelation.
Alex123 wrote:
In the case of paticcasamuppda there are moments where time plays a role. Ex: how can birth
arise at the same time as aging&death?
I knew that this question would come up. It depends on your understanding of
paticcasamuppda. It reminds me of Ven. anavira Thera who said:
The Buddha has said (Majjhima Nikaya 28) that he who sees the Dhamma sees
paticcasamuppda; and he has also said that the Dhamma is sanditthika and aklika, that it is
immediately visible and without involving time (see in particular Majjhima Nikaya 38). Now it is
evident that the twelve items, avijj to jarmarana, cannot, if the traditional interpretation is
correct, all be seen at once; for they are spread over three successive existences. I may, for
example, see present vina to vedan, but I cannot now see the kamma of the past existence
avijj and sankhrthat (according to the traditional interpretation) was the cause of these
present things. Or I may see tanh and so on, but I cannot now see the jti and jarmarana that
will result from these things in the next existence. And the situation is no better if it is argued
that since all twelve items are present in each existence it is possible to see them all at once. It
is, no doubt, true that all these things can be seen at once, but the avijj and sankhr that I
now see are the cause (says the traditional interpretation) of vina to vedan in the next
existence, and have no causal connexion with the vina to vedan that I now see. In other
words, the relation sankhrapaccay vinam cannot be seen in either case. The consequence
of this is that the paticcasamuppda formulation (if the traditional interpretation is correct) is
something that, in part at least, must be taken on trust. And even if there is memory of the
past existence the situation is still unsatisfactory, since memory is not on the same level of
certainty as present reflexive experience. Instead of imass'uppd idam uppajjati, imassa
nirodh idam nirujjhati, 'with arising of this this arises, with cessation of this this ceases', the
traditional interpretation says, in effect, imassa nirodh idam uppajjati, 'with cessation of this,
this arises'. It is needless to press this point further: either the reader will already have
recognized that this is, for him, a valid objection to the traditional interpretation, or he will
not. And if he has not already seen this as an objection, no amount of argument will open his
eyes.
However this thread is not the right place to discuss the various interpretations of D.O.
It depends on your understanding.
Pubbe cha bhikkhave, etarahi ca dukkhaceva papemi, dukkhassa ca nirodha. (M 22)
o
p
PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009
12:35 pm

by PeterB Sun Jun 27, 2010 9:27 am
P
o
" time
does not play any role at all ".....
s
t
which things arise.
. Time is dependant too. It is not the field in
o
p

by cooran Mon Jun 28, 2010 7:06 am

P
o
s
t
PeterB wrote:
" time does not play any role at all ".....

which things arise.
cooran
Posts: 8183
11:32 pm
Australia
. Time is dependant too. It is not the field in
Hello PeterB,
Sorry for being so blind .... but in which post does your quote above come?
with metta
Chris
p
PeterB
Posts: 3909
12:35 pm

by PeterB Mon Jun 28, 2010 7:16 am
P
It oisn't a direct quote. Its the result of
s
t
editing a quote.
o
p

by cooran Mon Jun 28, 2010 7:37 am
P
o
Ummmmmmmm
Can you give the
s
t
cooran
Posts: 8183
11:32 pm
Australia
unedited quote, or ...
---The trouble is that you think you have time-----Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe-----It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
o
p

by beeblebrox Mon Jun 28, 2010 8:16 pm
P
o
Cooran,
I think it came from Acinteyyo's second
s
t
post:
acinteyyo wrote:
Alex123 wrote:
Wow. Acinteyyo, how can result arise together (at exactly the same time) with its cause?
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009
It depends on the interrelation of cause and effect. You seem to be concernd only with temporal
interrelation. In that case the results obviously have to arise after its cause. There are cases

where the cause determines a result logically, where time doesn't play any role at all
concerning their interrelation.
10:41 pm
o
p

by Ben Tue Jun 29, 2010 12:03 am
P
o
Hmmm....
s
If tmemory serves me well I think I was
Ben
Site Admin
Posts: 17171
Joined: Wed Dec 31,
2008 12:49 am
Location:
War.loun.dig.er.ler
Contact:
C
o
n
t
a
c
t
B
e
n
reading something related to this in Vism in the

Dependent Origination chapter. From my readings, which I hope to confirm later, a cause and
effect cannot arise simultaneously.
However, will get back to you on that one.
kind regards
Ben
No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later.
All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance
in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725
Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) Buddhist Global Relief UNHCR
e: ben.dhammawheel@gmail.com..
o
p
Pasikhara
Posts: 980
Joined: Wed Oct 14,
2009 5:27 am
Contact:
C
o
n
t
a
c
t
P
a
s
i
k
h
a
r
a

by Pasikhara Tue Jun 29, 2010 2:15 am
P
o
s
cooran wrote:
t
Hello all,
My understanding is that the Buddha never taught that there was on cause and one effect. He
taught conditionality.
...
with metta
Chris
This is how Prof Y Karunadasa always explains and stresses it, too. He has details in his
"Dhamma Theory" booklet.
However, the Sarvastivadins did have a particular later causal system wherein cause and effect
arose simultaneously. From memory, it was called something like "sahajata" (together-born)
cause. This is mainly in their "six causes" system, rather than their somewhat earlier "four
conditions" system.
My recently moved Blog, containing some of my writings on the Buddha Dhamma, as well as a

number of translations from classical Buddhist texts and modern authors, liturgy, etc.: Huifeng's
Prajnacara Blog.
o
p
PeterB
Posts: 3909
12:35 pm

by PeterB Tue Jun 29, 2010 7:34 am
P
o
s
Ben wrote:
t
Hmmm....
If memory serves me well I think I was reading something related to this in Vism in the
Dependent Origination chapter. From my readings, which I hope to confirm later, a cause and
effect cannot arise simultaneously.
However, will get back to you on that one.
kind regards
Ben
From a temporal standpoint Ben that's true, however if time is arising dependently along with
everything else then simultaneously or sequentially have only relative existence. Which of
course has enormous implications when applied to other processes. Rebirth for example.
o
p

by Ben Tue Jun 29, 2010 7:55 am
P
HioPeter
s
I think
I well and truly did my head
t
Ben
Site Admin
Posts: 17171
Joined: Wed Dec 31,
2008 12:49 am
Location:
War.loun.dig.er.ler
Contact:
C
o
n
t
a
c
t
B
e
n
in trying to immerse myself in Buddhaghosa's explanation of

dependent origination. I know I've done my head in because I'm going back for another go! I'm
not much of a theoretical physicist but in my rudimentary understanding, causality seems to
presume that temporality is a field in which causality operates. Taking temporality out of the
equation doesn't help my understanding of causality. But then I'm not suggesting that it doesn't
explain things well for others.
Anyway, you reminded me to go digging through Vism again, and that can't be a bad thing - or
can it??.
metta
Ben
No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later.
All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance
in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725
Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) Buddhist Global Relief UNHCR
e: ben.dhammawheel@gmail.com..
o
p

by retrofuturist Tue Jun 29, 2010 8:11 am

P
o
Greetings,
s
t
Ben wrote:
I think I well and truly did my head in trying to immerse myself in Buddhaghosa's explanation of
dependent origination. I know I've done my head in because I'm going back for another go!
retrofuturist
Posts: 15729
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008
9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne,
Australia
Contact:
C
o
n
t
a
c
t
r
e
t
r
o
f
u
t
u
r
i
s
t
That's funny.
I remember encountering those chapters of the Visuddhimagga and thinking to myself whether
any of the Theravada bhikkhus who had inspired me to that point (e.g. Ajahn Chah, Ajahn
Sumedho, Thanissaro Bhikkhu) had actually understood, or felt the need to understand the
immense and intricate complexity of the explanation, let alone derived any benefit from it.
The words on the pages seemed worlds away from the pithy words of Ajahn Chah who said that
everything is teaching us.
Ven. Buddhaghosa may well provide an answer to the question, "Can effect arise simulteneously
with its cause?"... however not enough of the Buddhaghosa rendition of Dependent Origination
actually 'stuck' for me to comment. Again, that's neither here nor there, but that was my
experience, and Ben's comments made me smile.
Metta,
Retro.
"When we transcend one level of truth, the new level becomes what is true for us. The previous one
is now false. What one experiences may not be what is experienced by the world in general, but
that may well be truer. (Ven. Nanananda)
I hope, Anuruddha, that you are all living in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing,
blending like milk and water, viewing each other with kindly eyes. (MN 31)
Never again...
Display posts from previous: All posts

posts
Sort by Post
time
Post time
Ascending
Ascending
o
p
Go
21 posts
Post Reply
1
2
Return to General Theravda discussion
Jump to
WHO IS ONLINE
Users browsing this forum: Bhikkhu_Samahita, Bing [Bot], daverupa, websat11 and 6 guests
Google Saffron, Theravada Search Engine
Board index
Powered by phpBB Forum Software phpBB Limited
GZIP: Off
DhammaWheel.com is associated with DharmaWheel.net, DhammaWiki.com, and TheDhamma.com

Can Effect Arise Simulteneously With Its Cause - Dhamma Wheel

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Can Effect Arise Simulteneously With Its Cause - Dhamma Wheel

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?

A Buddhist discussion forum on the Dhamma of the

Board index Modern Theravda General Theravda discussion

Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?

Search this topic

Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?

Re: Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?

I had this idea that the separation between cause

Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause? - Dhamma Wheel

It's just yet

Re: Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?

possibly of interest to you on this topic: Retrocausality

Re: Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?

from one thing to another, but it actually remains the

Re: Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?

passes away before the cause.

Re: Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?

Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause? - Dhamma Wheel

"Freedom of the Will" in the light of Theravada Buddhist teachings

Re: Can effect arise simultaneously with its cause?

I don't see how that's possible by definition, [...]

In my eyes dependent origination (paticcasamuppda) is an example for cause and effect

Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause? - Dhamma Wheel

Re: Can effect arise simultaneously with its cause?

I don't see how that's possible by definition, [...]

Re: Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?

Nina's answer on dsg:

Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause? - Dhamma Wheel

> According to Theravadin abhidhamma yes. But feeling doesn't cause

Re: Can effect arise simultaneously with its cause?

Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause? - Dhamma Wheel

Re: Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?

. Time is dependant too. It is not the field in

Re: Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?

Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause? - Dhamma Wheel

" time does not play any role at all ".....

. Time is dependant too. It is not the field in

Re: Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?

Re: Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?

unedited quote, or ...

Re: Can effect arise simultaneously with its cause?

Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause? - Dhamma Wheel

Re: Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?

reading something related to this in Vism in the

Re: Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?

Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause? - Dhamma Wheel

Re: Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?

Re: Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?

in trying to immerse myself in Buddhaghosa's explanation of

Re: Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?

Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause? - Dhamma Wheel

Display posts from previous: All posts

Return to General Theravda discussion

Powered by phpBB Forum Software phpBB Limited

DhammaWheel.com is associated with DharmaWheel.net, DhammaWiki.com, and TheDhamma.com

S-ar putea să vă placă și