[6] [Paravādin:] Is the person (puggala) not apprehended (upalabbhati) in the sense of a real and ultimate fact (saccikaṭṭhaparamaṭṭhena)?
[Sakavādin:] Yes.
[Paravādin:] That which is real (saccikaṭṭho) and ultimate (paramaṭṭho) — is that person not apprehended in accordance with it, in the sense of a real and ultimate fact?
[Sakavādin:] It should not be said thus.
[Paravādin:] Acknowledge the refutation (niggaha)! If the person is not apprehended in the sense of a real and ultimate fact, then indeed, good sir, it should be said: "That which is real and ultimate — that person is not apprehended in accordance with it, in the sense of a real and ultimate fact." What you say there — that it should indeed be said, "The person is not apprehended in the sense of a real and ultimate fact," but it should not be said, "That which is real and ultimate — that person is not apprehended in accordance with it, in the sense of a real and ultimate fact" — is wrong. But if it should not be said, "That which is real and ultimate — that person is not apprehended in accordance with it, in the sense of a real and ultimate fact," then indeed, good sir, it should not be said, "The person is not apprehended in the sense of a real and ultimate fact." What you say there — that it should indeed be said, "The person is not apprehended in the sense of a real and ultimate fact," but it should not be said, "That which is real and ultimate — that person is not apprehended in accordance with it, in the sense of a real and ultimate fact" — is wrong.
The Pentad of the Reverse Argument (Paccanīkapañcaka)
English translation from the Pali (Siam Raṭṭha edition) — under review, not for citation.