Cause and effect in Advaita Vedanta

Cause and effect are an important topic in all schools of Vedanta. These concepts are discussed in ancient and medieval texts of Hinduism, and other Indian religions, using synonymous terms. Cause is referred to as ' (कारण), "nidana" (निदान), "hetu" (हेतु) or "mulam" (मूलम्), while effect is referred to as ' (कार्य), "phala" (फल), "parinam" (परिणाम) or "Shungam" (शुङ्ग). Vedanta sub-schools have proposed and debated different causality theories.
Causality.
All schools of Vedanta subscribe to the theory of "Satkāryavāda", which means that the effect is pre-existent in the cause. But there are different views on the causal relationship and the nature of the empirical world from the perspective of metaphysical Brahman. The "Brahma Sutras", the ancient Vedantins, most sub-schools of Vedanta, as well as Samkhya school of Hindu philosophy, support "Parinamavada", the idea that the world is a real transformation ("parinama") of Brahman.
Scholars disagree on the whether Adi Shankara and his Advaita Vedanta explained causality through "vivarta". According to Andrew Nicholson, instead of "parinama-vada", the competing causality theory is "Vivartavada", which says "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". The advocates of this illusive, unreal transformation based causality theory, states Nicholson, have been the Advaitins, the followers of Shankara. "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".
However, other scholars such as Hajime Nakamura and Paul Hacker disagree. Hacker and others state that Adi Shankara did not advocate "Vivartavada", and his explanations are "remote from any connotation of illusion". According to these scholars, it was the 13th century scholar Prakasatman who gave a definition to "Vivarta", and it is Prakasatman's theory that is sometimes misunderstood as Adi Shankara's position. To Shankara, the word "maya" has hardly any terminological weight. 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.
According to Eliot Deutsch, Advaita Vedanta states that from "the standpoint of Brahman-experience and Brahman itself, there is 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.
Nimitta kāraṇa and Upādāna kāraṇa.
Two sorts of causes are recognised:
Advaita states that effect () is non-different from cause (), but the cause is different from the effect:
This principle is called .
Effect is not different from cause.
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 2.1.9, Adi Shankara describes this as follows: