How to Use Proposition, Reason, and Example to Argue

The Buddhist logic (hetuvidyā) used by bodhisattvas is called thesis, reason, and example (宗因喻). The thesis is the proposition or viewpoint, the reason is the theory to be expounded, and the example is the analogy, instance, and fact. How thesis, reason, and example are applied will now be illustrated with an example.

Someone says that the manas is one of the six faculties and, like the five material faculties, is a material faculty. After we have engaged in logical deliberation that accords with the Dharma and with reason, we demonstrate and expound: the manas is not a material faculty but a non-material faculty. The topic to be demonstrated first is precisely the viewpoint, the concept, and the thesis: the manas is a non-material faculty. Once the thesis has been put forward, it must be expounded comprehensively and completely, presenting evidence and reasoning; after the principles have been clearly expounded, concrete examples are then adduced, letting the facts speak. In this way, the theoretical evidence is closely tied to the thesis, and the examples are closely tied to the demonstration and the principles—each link interlocking with the next, tightly fitted without any gaps. This carries the strongest persuasive power; even if someone objects, they cannot articulate any reasons. If one objects merely for the sake of objecting, or debates merely for the sake of debating, both the objection and the debate are ineffective.

Of course, if one lacks rigorous logical deliberation and one's power of wisdom is insufficient, the evidence will be inadequate, and there will be no strong theoretical support; the content one expounds will then fail to demonstrate the correctness of the thesis. If the deliberation is not rigorous and the exposition is not comprehensive, there will be gaps and loopholes, lacking persuasive power, insufficient to convince others. If the examples cited are far-fetched and cannot help demonstrate the correctness and soundness of the evidence, the persuasive power of the evidence will also be greatly diminished, and one cannot win people over. The capacity for logical reasoning reflects the level of wisdom of a practitioner; the stronger the wisdom, the more meticulous the deliberation, the more powerful the reasoning capacity, the more persuasive it is, and the greater the ability to deliver sentient beings. Those who practice the bodhisattva path, when encountering problems, should engage in deep and subtle deliberation and contemplative practice (vipaśyanā-caryā), continually improving their own capacity for logical deliberation and observation. Of course, the prerequisite is very deep meditative concentration (samādhi); when deliberation is needed, one can then cast aside all interference and concentrate on deep, careful thought, and only then can one solve the problem.