Mandukya Karika, verse 4.17

Sanskrit text, IAST transliteration and English translation

फलादुत्पद्यमानस्सन्न ते हेतुः प्रसिध्यति ।
अप्रसिद्धः कथं हेतुः फलमुत्पादयिष्यति ॥ १७ ॥

phalādutpadyamānassanna te hetuḥ prasidhyati |
aprasiddhaḥ kathaṃ hetuḥ phalamutpādayiṣyati || 17 ||

17. Your cause cannot be established if it be produced from the effect. How can the causey which is itself not established, give birth to the effect?

Shankara Bhashya (commentary)

How can there be no causal relation? It is thus replied:—The cause¹ cannot have a definite existence if it is to be born of an effect which is, itself, yet unborn, and therefore which is non-existent like the horns of a hare. How² can the cause contemplated by you, which is, itself, indefinite and which is non-existent like the horns of a hare, produce an effect? Two things which are mutually dependent upon each other for their production and which are like³ the horns of a hare, cannot be related as cause and effect or in⁴ any other way.

Anandagiri Tika (glossary)

This Kārika proves that the very idea of the causal relation involves an absurdity. The contention of the opponent is this:—The cause and the effect are dependent upon each other for their mutual production. A house is built for the purpose of living. The thought of living results in the building of the house. The absurdity of this contention is thus shown:—The general law of causality is that the cause is antecedent and the effect is subsequent to and dependent upon a cause. If the effect be the cause of a cause, then the cause is said to be born from something which is not yet in existence. If the cause is to be produced from a non-existent effect, then the cause itself becomes non-existent. And the cause, being itself non-existent, can but produce an effect which also is nonexistent. Thus both cause and effect become non-existent like the horns of a hare. Therefore they cannot be related as cause and effect, which relation can subsist only between two existing entities.

¹ Cause, etc.—If you say that the cause is produced from the effect (which, itself, on account of its appearing after cause, is yet non-existent), then cause cannot be established. For, in that case it is also non-existent, as it is admitted to be the product of an effect which is, itself, non-existent.

² How can, etc.—If the cause itself be thus proved to be nonexistent, how can it, then, produce an effect? If it cannot produce an effect, how do you call it the cause?

³ Likey etc.—It is because both the cause and the effect have been proved to be non-existent.

⁴ In any, etc.—Any other relation, such as that of the container and the contained, between two things which are non-existent becomes an absurdity.