so out of these three approaches to causality, which is the one you favor or rely upon?
They are three different approaches, but my understanding of causality is more advanced than the others other.
It makes for powerful meditation to consider causes, moving backwards, that have brought yourself to it's present state, and then (Buddhist approach) see these as are part of an endless web of samsara/suffering and are "empty" or Western Approach, consider that the move backwards to a first cause, God.
The rationalist approach also has powerful meditation associated with it, called "Negative theology" where one progressively describes Zen/Tao/God but what it is not. Most of the Tao Te Ching is doing this. Zen probably takes this the furthest by resulting in seemingly paradoxical statements, such as koans.
An example of a Teleological Meditation would include Gratitude meditation, which considers that loving purpose behind actions others have done for you, or god's love in the creation of the world.
They are three different approaches, but my understanding of causality is more advanced than the others other.
It makes for powerful meditation to consider causes, moving backwards, that have brought yourself to it's present state, and then (Buddhist approach) see these as are part of an endless web of samsara/suffering and are "empty" or Western Approach, consider that the move backwards to a first cause, God.
The rationalist approach also has powerful meditation associated with it, called "Negative theology" where one progressively describes Zen/Tao/God but what it is not. Most of the Tao Te Ching is doing this. Zen probably takes this the furthest by resulting in seemingly paradoxical statements, such as koans.
An example of a Teleological Meditation would include Gratitude meditation, which considers that loving purpose behind actions others have done for you, or god's love in the creation of the world.