Can effect arise simulteneously with its cause?

[Ben]

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

[Paññāsikhara]

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.

[PeterB]

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.

[Ben]

Hi Peter
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! 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

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

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!

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.

[PeterB]

In the end its bums on cushions isn't it ?

For me the main, perhaps only ,relevance of the temporarity issue is the bearing it has on providing a different way of viewing Rebirth..that points to an accommodation with Buddhadasa..