UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

In kevalānvayi anumāna, the hetu occurs only where the sādhya also occurs, and there are effectively no genuine negative instances where hetu is present but sādhya is absent. The classic example involves knowability and nameability, since all knowable objects are taken to be nameable, and there is no case of something knowable that is not nameable. This yields a purely affirmative pattern of concomitance.

Option A:
Option A is the usual smoke–fire example, but that is treated as anvayavyatireki, because we can also observe negative instances where neither smoke nor fire is present.

Option B:
Option B correctly illustrates an inference where only positive instances are available, supporting the kevalānvayi classification.

Option C:
Option C involves debated metaphysical claims about the self and production; it is not a standard kevalānvayi illustration and may be controversial.

Option D:
Option D contains an asiddha hetu because the sky is not a lotus; it primarily exemplifies defective reasoning rather than kevalānvayi.