From Rāmānuja’s commentary
It is in no way possible that the effect should be non-different from the cause.
Asatkāryavāda
Definition
The effect does not exist before its production and is a substance distinct from its cause. This is the Nyaya-Vaisesika (Kanada) position: neither Sankara nor Ramanuja endorses it anywhere in the current corpus. It is instantiated as a ConceptSense because both commentators substantively reconstruct and refute it at length, not because either affirms it.
Related Satkāryavāda
Evidence from Śaṅkara, Rāmānuja and Madhva
Related sūtras
Where the commentaries discuss this concept. Open a sūtra to read the commentary context.
Rāmānuja
Viśiṣṭādvaita VedāntaMadhva
Dvaita VedāntaFrom Madhva’s commentary
As the cause ceases to exist when it has produced its effect, it cannot be said to produce special effects again
when the body of not-inhering atoms has produced its effect, viz., the aggre- gate of inhering atoms, the same cause, vis., the not- inhering atoms cannot again become the cause of other effects
From Madhva’s commentary
it would be a contradiction to on& of the fundamental assumptions (of the system) that the cause necessarily exists while yet the effect takes place
Thus there would be an endless production of effects.
all the causes and effects would have a simultaneous existence
Śaṅkara
Advaita VedāntaFrom Śaṅkara’s commentary