Advaita Vedanta

===''Parinamavada'' and ''vivartavada'' - causality and change ===
{{See also|Samkhya#Causality|l1=Satkāryavāda|Ajativada|Vivartavada}}

Cause and effect are an important topic in all schools of [[Vedanta]].{{refn|group=note|These concepts are discussed in ancient and medieval texts of [[Hinduism]], and other Indian religions, using synonymous terms. Cause is referred to as ''{{IAST|kāraṇa}}'' (कारण),  ''nidana'' (निदान), ''hetu'' (हेतु) or ''mulam'' (मूलम्), while effect is referred to as ''{{IAST|kārya}}'' (कार्य), ''phala'' (फल), ''parinam'' (परिणाम) or ''Shungam'' (शुङ्ग).<ref group=web name ="spokensanskrit_cause"/>{{sfnp|Nagao|1991|pp=127–128}} Two sorts of causes are recognised, namely {{IAST|Nimitta kāraṇa}}, the [[efficient cause]], that which causes the existence of the universe, and {{IAST|Upādāna kāraṇa}}, the [[material cause]], that from which the matery of this universe comes.{{sfnp|Lipner|1996|pp=109–126}} All schools of Vedānta agree that Brahman is both the material and the efficient cause, and all subscribe to the theory of ''[[Satkaryavada|Satkāryavāda]]'',<ref group=web name="IEP_Bheda"/> which means that the effect is pre-existent in the cause.{{sfn|Nicholson|2010|p=27}}{{refn|group=note|Advaita furthermore states that effect ({{IAST|''kārya''}}) is non-different from cause ({{IAST|''kāraṇa''}}), but the cause is different from the effect. This principle is called {{IAST|''kārya-kāraṇa ananyatva''}}. When the cause is destroyed, the effect will no longer exist. For example, cotton cloth is the effect of the cotton threads, which is the material cause. Without threads there will be no cotton cloth. Without cotton there will be no thread. According to Swami Sivananda, in his comments on the {{IAST|Brahmasūtra-Bhāṣya}} 2.1.9, Adi Shankara describes this as follows:
{{blockquote|{{IAST|''ananyatve'pi kāryakāraṇayoḥ kāryasya kāraṇātmatvaṃ na tu kāraṇasya kāryātmatvaṃ''}}<br>Despite the non-difference of cause and effect, the effect has its self in the cause but not the cause in the effect.<br>The effect is of the nature of the cause and not the cause the nature of the effect.<br>Therefore the qualities of the effect cannot touch the cause.<ref group=web>{{cite web|url=http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/bs_2/bs_2.1.03.html |title=Brahma Sutras by Swami Sivananda |publisher=Swami-krishnananda.org |access-date=2011-06-10| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110612173736/http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/bs_2/bs_2.1.03.html| archive-date= 12 June 2011 | url-status= live}}</ref>}}}}

There are different views on the origination of the empirical world from Brahman. All commentators "agree that Brahman is the cause of the world," but disagree on how exactly Brahman is the cause of the world.{{sfn|Nicholson|2010|p=27}} According to Nicholson, "Mediaeval Vedantins distinguished two basic positions." ''[[Parinama-vada (Hindu thought)|Parinamavada]]'' is the idea that the world is a real transformation (''parinama'') of Brahman.{{sfn|Nicholson|2010|p=27}} ''[[Vivartavada]]'' is the idea that 
{{blockquote|the world is merely an unreal manifestation (''vivarta'') of Brahman. Vivartavada states that although Brahman appears to undergo a transformation, in fact no real change takes place. The myriad of beings are unreal manifestation, as the only real being is Brahman, that ultimate reality which is unborn, unchanging, and entirely without parts.{{sfn|Nicholson|2010|p=27}}}}

{{Quote box |width=25em | bgcolor=#e6f2ff |align=right |salign = right
|quote=20th verse of ''Brahmajnanavalimala'', attributed to Shankara:

ब्रह्म सत्यं जगन्मिथ्या <br/>
जीवो ब्रह्मैव नापरः

Brahman is real, the world is an illusion<br/>
Brahman and [[Jiva]] are not different.

''Brahmajnanavalimala'' 1.20<ref>Sanskrit:[https://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_z_misc_shankara/brahmajna.html?lang=sa Sanskrit documents] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210623112419/https://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_z_misc_shankara/brahmajna.html?lang=sa |date=23 June 2021 }}, Brahmajnanalimala 1.20</ref>}}

The ''Brahma Sutras'', the ancient Vedantins, most sub-schools of Vedānta,{{sfn|Nicholson|2010|p=27}}<ref group="web" name="IEP_Bheda" /> as well as Samkhya argue for ''parinamavada''.<ref group="web" name="IEP_Bheda" /> The "most visible advocates of Vivartavada," states Nicholson, are the Advaitins, the followers of Shankara.{{sfn|Nicholson|2010|p=27}} "Although the world can be described as conventionally real", adds Nicholson, "the Advaitins claim that all of Brahman's effects must ultimately be acknowledged as unreal before the individual self can be liberated".<ref group="web" name="IEP_Bheda" />{{refn|group=note|According to Eliot Deutsch, Advaita Vedānta states that from "the standpoint of Brahman-experience and Brahman itself, there is [[Ajativada|no creation]]" in the absolute sense, all empirically observed creation is relative and mere transformation of one state into another, all states are provisional and a cause-effect driven modification.{{sfn|Deutsch|1973|pp=40–43}}}}

Yet, Adi Shankara himself most likely explained causality through ''parinamavada''.<ref group="web" name="IEP_Bheda" />{{sfn|King|1999|p=221}}{{sfn|Nicholson|2010|p=27}}{{sfn|Mayeda|2006|pp=25–27}} In Shankara's works "''Brahman'' constitutes the basic essence (''svabhava'') of the universe (BS Bh 3.2.21) and as such the universe cannot be thought of as distinct from it (BS Bh 2.1.14)." In Shankara's view, then, "The world is real, but only in so far as its existence is seen as totally dependent upon ''Brahman''."{{sfn|King|1999|p=221}}

Shankara introduced the concept of "Unevolved Name-and-Form," or primal matter corresponding to ''Prakriti'', from which the world evolves,{{sfn|Mayeda|1992|p=20}} but this concept was not adopted by the later Advaita tradition.{{sfn|Mayeda|2006|pp=25–27}} Vivartavada became the dominant explanation, with which the primacy of Atman/Brahman can be maintained.{{sfn|Koller|2006}}{{sfn|Koller|2013}} Scholars such as Hajime Nakamura and Paul Hacker already noted that Adi Shankara did not advocate ''Vivartavada'', and his explanations are "remote from any connotation of illusion".{{sfn|Mayeda|2006|pp=25–27}}{{refn|group=note|According to Hugh Nicholson, "the definitive study on the development of the concept of ''vivarta'' in Indian philosophy, and in Advaita Vedanta in particular, remains Hacker's ''Vivarta''.{{sfn|Nicholson, Hugh|2011|pp=266 note 20, 167–170}}  According to Hacker, "the word ''maya'' has for [Shankara] hardly any terminological weight."{{sfn|Nicholson, Hugh|2011|p=266 note 21}}}}

It was the 13th century scholar Prakasatman, who founded the influential [[Vivarana]] school, who gave a definition to ''vivarta'', introducing the notion that the world is illusory. It is Prakasatman's theory that is sometimes misunderstood as Adi Shankara's position.{{sfn|Mayeda|2006|pp=25–27}} Andrew Nicholson concurs with Hacker and other scholars, adding that the ''vivarta-vada'' isn't Shankara's theory, that Shankara's ideas appear closer to ''parinama-vada'', and the ''vivarta'' explanation likely emerged gradually in Advaita subschool later.<ref group="web" name="IEP_Bheda" />{{refn|group=note|Compare the misunderstanding of [[Yogachara]]s concept of [[The doctrine of Vijñapti-mātra|vijñapti-mātra]], 'representation-only', as 'consciousness-only'.}}