Compare between satyakaryavada and asatkaryavada.

Satyakaryavada and Asatkaryavada are two philosophical perspectives within Indian philosophy, specifically within the context of the philosophy of causation. These perspectives offer differing views on the nature and reality of the effect (karya) in relation to the cause (karan).

1. Satyakaryavada:

   • Basic Tenet: Satyakaryavada, associated primarily with the Vedanta school of thought, posits that the effect is real and pre-exists in the cause. In other words, the effect is not a new creation but is already inherent in the cause.
   • Temporal Aspect: According to Satyakaryavada, the effect exists in a potential or unmanifest form within the cause from eternity. The cause undergoes a transformation or modification, revealing the already existing effect.
   • Example: One common analogy used to explain Satyakaryavada is that of the clay and the pot. The pot, in its unmanifest form, exists within the clay, and when the potter shapes the clay, the pot becomes manifest. The pot is not created ex nihilo but is a transformation of the pre-existing clay.

2. Asatkaryavada:

   • Basic Tenet: Asatkaryavada, associated primarily with the Nyaya-Vaisheshika school, proposes that the effect is non-existent in the cause before its manifestation. The effect comes into being only when the cause undergoes a transformation, and it is not pre-existent in any form.
   • Temporal Aspect: Asatkaryavada holds that the effect is a new creation, emerging in the course of causation. The cause undergoes a real change, and the effect is brought into existence as a result of this transformation.
   • Example: Using the same analogy of the pot and clay, Asatkaryavada suggests that the pot is a genuinely new entity that comes into existence through the potter's actions. The pot is not inherent in the clay but is a product of the potter's creative effort.

Comparison:

1. Existence of the Effect:

   • Satyakaryavada: Affirms the pre-existence of the effect in the cause. The effect is real and latent within the cause.
   • Asatkaryavada: Posits that the effect comes into existence only when the cause undergoes a transformation. The effect is not pre-existent but is a new creation.

2. Nature of Transformation:

   • Satyakaryavada: Recognizes a transformative change in the cause, revealing the already existing effect. The transformation is more of a manifestation than a creation.
   • Asatkaryavada: Advocates for a real change in the cause, resulting in the emergence of a new and distinct effect.

3. Examples:

   • Satyakaryavada: Often employs analogies like the seed and the tree or the clay and the pot to illustrate the idea that the effect is inherent in the cause.
   • Asatkaryavada: Uses examples such as the sparks emerging from striking flint or the curdling of milk to highlight the idea that the effect is a genuinely new entity.

In summary, while both Satyakaryavada and Asatkaryavada address the relationship between cause and effect, they diverge in their views on the pre-existence of the effect in the cause and the nature of the transformative process. Satyakaryavada asserts the reality of the effect within the cause, while Asatkaryavada maintains that the effect is a novel creation arising from the transformation of the cause.