If it's not off topic, I would like to mention some insights from physics. Our concepts of causality are deeply linked to our picture of time.
It has long been recognised, since general relativity described time as a dimension along with those of space, and pointed towards our origins in a big bang, that time as we know it did not exist before any singularity, assuming there was one (it could have started at a given size, eg Planck scale). A common view among physicists is that the singularity could have occured from a quantum fluctuation, and be essentially random, and just one of infinite possible outcomes of the fundamental constants which could have 'crystalised' out. It is widely suspected the energy, angular momentum, and other variables, of the universe as a whole cancel out, which would seem to support this.
In the Wheeler-DeWitt equation, which is our best attempt to describe the relativistic quantum evolution of the universe as a whole, time drops out. And with quantum systems in general like electron orbitals, we deal with state spaces and probabilities, rather than conventional time evolution. In loop quantum gravity, the main competitor to string theory, Carlo Rovelli describes probabilities 'crowding around' interactions, with time-ordering just the result of what is closest, which may point toward how to think of things happening without time.
Probably the deepest insight we have in accepted physics is called Noether's theorem - more people should know about this remarkable woman's profound contribution (https://www.sciencenews.org/article/emmy-noether-theorem-legacy-physics-math). Her insight is that conservation laws are directly equivalent to symmetries. You probably remember using a mirror to identify rotational, reflected, and translational symmetries of geometrical shapes. It turns out those have deep implications and for instance, frame invariance, not being able to tell from within a system that you are moving or spinning, are directly equivalent to conservation of linear and rotational momentum. So the principles we use to define causality, conservation of mass, energy, charge etc directly arise with the nature of the place in which things are experienced.
Susskind and others have used the idea of information conservation to resolve the black hole information paradox. This is basically that the old picture thought black holes could evaporate with no record left even in principle to record what went in. That could be viewed as a 'break' in causality, and the resolution like this, that even at any big bang singularity causality may hold, perhaps points toward an eternal universe rather than one created at finite-time. The bigger picture of information conservation points toward the Many Worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, in which information is conserved from all quantum outcomes, but we only see some of them in our slice of the multiverse.
I don't know if that contributes to answering the question, except to suggest in deep ways, we don't know yet. Resolving the nature of time is arguably the biggest remaining problem in physics, and causality will follow it.