Short answer: I don’t know.
First, to be honest, I don’t know whether I can apply my usual understanding of the word ’caused’ to this problem at all. I think of cause as something that connects events A and B when A occurred before B and B’s occurrence was dependent on A happening.
The trouble is, before the Universe, it’s far from clear that there’s any clear way to talk about before. I can only think about time as a property of spacetime, which came into existence at the moment of the Big Bang, as far as we know. Without spacetime, I don’t believe the concepts of distance or duration (necessary to think about time) can exist.
It’s entirely possible that my understanding or Time or the Big Bang is flawed, but, without an alternate, plausible conception of either, I can’t make much headway on this question.
I mention all this, because this standard of evidence is similar to the one I subject Christianity to, and I’ve found it wanting. The primary proof I’ve been offered for Christianity is that it offers a fuller explanation for morality than I’ve come been able to come up with myself. However, as long as Christianity only explains pre-observed phenomena, it’s explanatory power is not persuasive evidence alone. Either there must be evidence for the mechanism by which it works, or it should be able to make predictions whose truth values are not yet known, but turn out to be true upon testing.
Otherwise, I see no reason to give up truthful uncertainty for the sake of having an explanation, if the explanation doesn’t go beyond what I already know.