Satkaryavada

One of the three causal models in Indian
philosophy, along with asatkaryavada
and anekantavada. All three models seek
to explain the relationship between causes
and their effects in the everyday world,
which has profound implications for religious life. All the philosophical schools
assume that if one understands the causal
process correctly, and can manipulate it
through one’s conscious actions, it is possible to gain final liberation of the soul
(moksha). Thus, disagreements over different causal models are not merely academic disputes but are grounded in basically
different assumptions about the nature of
things. The satkaryavada model assumes
that effects preexist in their causes, which
can thus be seen as transformations (real
or apparent) of those causes. The classic
example is the transformation of milk to
curds, butter, and clarified butter.
According to satkaryavada proponents,
each of these effects was already present in
the cause, and emerges from it through a
natural transformation of that cause.
This causal model tends to reduce the
number of causes in the universe, since
anything can be seen as a transformation of other things. Given these strong
606
Satkaryavada
relationships, if one can understand how
these relationships work, they can be
manipulated to one’s advantage. The disadvantage of this model is that it can lead
to fatalism. In a world in which everything
occurs through natural transformation, it
can seem as if the universe is running
under its own power, and that human
actions may not be able to influence such
strong relationships. The philosophical
schools espousing this model are the
Samkhyas, proponents of Bhedabhada,
Ramanuja’s Vishishthadvaita Vedanta,
and the various branches of Advaita
Vedanta. The first three believe that the
difference between cause and effect is a
genuine transformation of the cause,
whereas the Advaita school stresses that
this transformation is only apparent, and
that the real source of bondage (and liberation) lies in avidya, the fundamental lack
of understanding that causes one to misperceive the nature of things. For further
information see Karl H. Potter (ed.), Presuppositions of India’s Philosophies, 1972.