Cause and effect

The Rabbi in the second book claims that the reason why an effect has a cause is not because of our experience, but because there is a logical logic to it. [Therefore, Kant’s words were rejected] But I do not understand, according to this definition, why only something in our experience should have a cause. If the definition were like Kant’s, this is understandable, but if the basis of the argument is apparently logical, it applies both to something in our experience and to something outside of it. With thanks, Dvir