The Buddha expressed this/that conditionality [idappaccayata] in a
simple-looking formula:
(1) When this is, that is.
SYNCHRONIC (objects)(2) From the arising of this comes the arising of that.
LINEAR (events)(3) When this isn’t, that isn’t.
SYNCHRONIC (objects)(4) From the stopping of this comes the stopping of that.
LINEAR (events)~ A 10.92
There are many possible ways of interpreting this formula, but only one does
justice both to the way the formula is worded and to the complex, fluid manner
in which specific examples of causal relationships are described in the Canon.
That way is to view the formula as the interplay of two causal principles, one
linear and the other synchronic,
that combine to form a nonlinear pattern.
The linear principle – taking (2) and (4) as a pair – connects events, rather
than objects, over time; the synchronic principle – (1) and (3) – connects
objects and events in the present moment. The two principles intersect, so that
any given event is influenced by two sets of conditions:
input acting from thepast and input acting from the present. Although each principle seems simple,
the fact that they interact makes their consequences very complex.
To begin with, every act has repercussions in the present moment together with
reverberations extending into the future. Depending on the intensity of the
act, these reverberations can last for a very short or a very long time. Thus
every event takes place in a context determined by the combined effects of past
events coming from a wide range in time, together with the effects of present
acts.
These effects can intensify one another, can coexist with little interaction or
can cancel one another out. Thus, even though it is possible to predict that a
certain type of act will tend to give a certain type of result – for example,
acting on anger will lead to pain –
there is no way to predict when or wherethat result will make itself felt.
The complexity of the system is further enhanced by the fact that both causal
principles meet at the mind. Through its views and intentions, the mind takes a
causal role in keeping both principles in action. Through its sensory powers it
is affected by the results of the causes it has set in motion. This creates the
possibility for the
causal principles to feed back into themselves, as the mind
reacts to the results of its own actions.
These reactions can take the form of positive feedback loops, intensifying the
original input and its results, much like the howl in a speaker placed next to
the microphone feeding into it. They can also create negative feedback loops,
counteracting the original input, much like the action of a thermostat that
turns off a heater when the temperature in a room is too high, and turns it on
again when it gets too low. Because the results of actions can be immediate,
and the mind can then react to them immediately, these feedback loops can at
times quickly spin out of control; at other times, they may act as skillful
checks on one’s behavior.
For example, a man may act out of anger, which gives him an immediate sense of
dis-ease to which he may react with further anger, thus creating a snowballing
effect. On the other hand, he may come to understand that the anger is causing
his dis-ease, and so immediately does what he can to stop it. However, there
can also be times when the results of his past actions may obscure the dis-ease
he is causing himself in the present, so that he does not immediately react to
it one way or another. In this way,
the combination of two causal principles –influences from the past interacting with those in the immediate present –accounts for the complexity of causal relationships as they function on thelevel of immediate experience. However, the combination of the two principles
also opens the possibility for finding a systematic way to break the causal
web.
If causes and effects were entirely linear, the cosmos would be totally
deterministic, and nothing could be done to escape the machinations of the
causal process.
If they were entirely synchronic, there would be no relationship from one
moment to the next, and all events would be arbitrary. The web could break down
totally or reform spontaneously for no reason at all.
However, with the two modes working together, one can learn from causalpatterns observed from the past and apply one’s insights to disentangling thesame causal patterns acting in the present.
If one’s insights are true, one can then gain freedom from those patterns.
For this reason, the principle of this/that conditionality provides an ideal
foundation, both theoretical and practical, for a doctrine of release.
And, as a teacher, the Buddha took full advantage of its implications, using it
in such a way that it accounts not only for the presentation and content of his
teachings, but also for their organization, their function, and their utility.
It even accounts for the need for the teachings and for the fact that the
Buddha was able to teach them in the first place.
~ Thanissaro Bhikkhu, ‘The Wings to Awakening,’ pp 10-12
(the formatting is mine)