Question

Good evening!
Yaakobi asked about Kant: if, as he says, the entire principle of causality exists only in the phenomenon, then there is no reason or ability at all to determine that there is a noumenon, since there is no causality there.
I would like to argue exactly the opposite: indeed, to the noumenon as prior to the world of phenomena, it is truly impossible to attribute causality that causes phenomena to occur. However, it necessarily follows that there is something beyond the phenomenon, which is a product of our cognition, because we did not create ourselves.
That is, my claim is that Yaakobi’s whole question is correct only when one defines the noumenon as existing outside of / prior to our cognition (the phenomenon). But if we reverse this and claim / define the noumenon as a source prior to our cognition (perhaps this fits with the Rabbi’s intention, in that intuition recognizes a law such as causality and in ethics, etc.?), then it necessarily exists.
Thank you very much!