According to Osho, yes—cause and effect end in the moment of the act: the fire, the putting-in, and even the immediate burning are over. What remains is the residue, the 'burned hand'—a lasting condition or imprint. The chain ceases, but its trace persists, calling for awareness, healing, and transformation now.
Yes—the event is finished, but the scar it leaves is still there and must be cared for.
From the Discourses
Passages where Osho speaks to this question — each links to the complete discourse.
Didn’t both cause and effect end at that moment?
Cause-and-effect did end. Suppose you put your hand into the fire; you pull it out—so the act of putting it in is over. Your hand got burned—that too is over. The burning in the hand also ended. But the burned hand remained with you—a burned hand. Not the fire, not the putting-in: the burned hand. You understand what I mean, don’t you?
Osho, when we are reborn, where is the accounting kept? What remains?
We are all bundles of habits. If you want to change these habits, resolve is needed. And the beginning of resolve is this: that it dawns on you that they can be changed. If you think they cannot be changed, your resolve will die completely. A German Jew, Frankl, during the last world war was imprisoned in a great camp. He has written—he has written very astonishing things—in his memoirs. Because he is a psychologist, he kept observing what was happening. December was approaching; the festival days were near. All the prisoners hoped that at least around Christmas there would be release; that around Christmas Hitler would show mercy and people would be freed. Frankl writes: until Christmas, however many tortures the prisoners were given, no one died. People remained ill, but there was a hope—Christmas is approaching. With that hope, there was strength in their life-breath. He writes: the…
Question: THERE ARE TWO KINDS OF NONATTACHMENT: THE ORDINARY AND THE SUBLIME. THAT ATTITUDE OF NONATTACHMENT TO THE OBJECTS OF DESIRE IN WHICH THE SEEKER KNOWS THAT HE IS NEITHER THE DOER NOR THE ENJOYER, NEITHER THE RESTRAINED NOR THE RESTRAINER, IS CALLED ORDINARY NONATTACHMENT. HE KNOWS THAT WHATEVER FACES HIM IN THIS LIFE IS THE RESULT OF THE DEEDS OF HIS PAST LIFE. WHETHER IN PLEASURE OR IN PAIN, HE CAN DO NOTHING. INDULGENCE IS BUT A DISEASE AND AFFLUENCE OF ALL KINDS A STOREHOUSE OF ADVERSITY. EVERY UNION LEADS INEVITABLY TO SEPARATION. THE IGNORANT SUFFER THE MALADIES OF MENTAL ANXIETY. ALL MATERIAL THINGS ARE PERISHABLE, BECAUSE TIME IS CONSTANTLY DEVOURING THEM. THROUGH THE UNDERSTANDING OF SCRIPTURAL PRECEPTS, ONE'S FAITH IN MATERIAL THINGS IS UPROOTED AND ONE'S MIND FREED OF THEM. THIS IS CALLED ORDINARY NONATTACHMENT.
Osho, does living moment-to-moment begin the awareness of interdependence?
You have heard of Baital Pachisi (the Vetala tales). You would never suppose it could be a teaching for the wise—yet this land has made unique experiments. It has produced books that can be read on many levels, with layer upon layer of meaning—two, three, four, five meanings running parallel like five roads side by side. Thus whoever you are, there is a way. A small child enjoys it; the supreme knower enjoys it. The seeker finds the path; the arrived recognizes the destination. For one who is neither, it is a diversion—that too is something, a little entertainment. The first story goes like this. Emperor Vikramaditya was in court when a fakir arrived. As custom had it, people came in the morning to offer gifts. The fakir offered a wild-looking fruit. The emperor smiled—why come so far to offer a jungle fruit? But a fakir has nothing else, so…
Another friend has asked: if it is true that I come to rest in non-doing, settle into the Purusha, stop in the witnessing within my consciousness—then, as Krishna says, whatever conduct then occurs carries neither loss nor gain, no sin and no virtue. That friend has asked: when all my wanting has fallen, desire has dissolved, and when I have known my Purusha, then how will any conduct happen at all? When I have come to rest in my soul, how will any conduct happen?
This is worth thinking about. This question will arise, because all the conduct we know is born of desire. You walk because there is somewhere to reach. If someone says there is nowhere to reach—then walk as much as you like—you will say, Why would we walk? If walking has no meaning, no purpose, no reason, why walk? We are not mad to walk without cause when there is nowhere to get to—no urge, no desire, no destination. We act out of some craving. So the friend’s question is perfectly valid: when craving itself is gone, and it is understood that action is just an acting-out; when it is clearly seen that there is nothing to attain and nowhere to arrive—then what does Krishna mean by saying, “Let whatever conduct happen; then there will be neither rebirth nor any karmic result of conduct”? Why would conduct happen at all? This…