The equivalence of cause, impermanence, and entity stopped me.
Not a list of three separate properties. The same thing, seen from three angles.
Modern physics circles something similar: any physical state necessarily has causal power. There's no neutral participant in a system. Any entity that exists also, necessarily, affects.
The substantial cause vs. cooperative condition distinction maps interestingly onto how biologists distinguish intrinsic causes from enabling environments. Though the shared substance-continuum criterion is more precise than anything in Western philosophy of causation I've encountered.
The karma example grounds it in practice: past karma as the uncommon cause, the one that varies person to person. Conditions are cooperative causes, common to many. It reframes karma not as punishment but as a causal trajectory that conditions can accelerate or redirect.
Does the neoshakya tradition treat the cooperative condition as equally indispensable, or does it give the substantial cause a privileged status in the chain?
To believe in the existence of past and future lives, one needs to understand causality in the narrow sense, as well as impermanence.
Anjali
🌼🌼🌼
The law of cause and effect permeates all dharmas, both worldly and transcendental.🙏💛
🙏🙏🙏
🙏🙏🙏
🌹🌹🌹🙏🙏🙏
The equivalence of cause, impermanence, and entity stopped me.
Not a list of three separate properties. The same thing, seen from three angles.
Modern physics circles something similar: any physical state necessarily has causal power. There's no neutral participant in a system. Any entity that exists also, necessarily, affects.
The substantial cause vs. cooperative condition distinction maps interestingly onto how biologists distinguish intrinsic causes from enabling environments. Though the shared substance-continuum criterion is more precise than anything in Western philosophy of causation I've encountered.
The karma example grounds it in practice: past karma as the uncommon cause, the one that varies person to person. Conditions are cooperative causes, common to many. It reframes karma not as punishment but as a causal trajectory that conditions can accelerate or redirect.
Does the neoshakya tradition treat the cooperative condition as equally indispensable, or does it give the substantial cause a privileged status in the chain?