UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

Anumana is inferential knowledge that proceeds from cognition of a sign to cognition of an unperceived fact based on their established universal concomitance. It is mediate because it requires prior awareness of vyapti linking the hetu and sadhya. Classical examples include inferring fire on a hill from the perception of smoke. Hence the mode of knowledge described in the stem is anumana.

Option A:
Option A, sabda, is verbal testimony and yields knowledge on the strength of a trustworthy speaker rather than on the recognition of a sign–probandum relation. It does not rely on universal concomitance in the sense required by inference. Therefore sabda cannot be the answer here.

Option B:
Option B, upamana, operates through comparison between an unknown object and a known one and uses similarity rather than a strict vyapti as in anumana. Although it can involve a kind of indirect reasoning, it is treated as a distinct pramana, not as inference proper.

Option C:
Option C is correct because anumana directly names knowledge grounded in linga and vyapti. It formalises the everyday practice of drawing conclusions from perceptible marks to imperceptible facts, making such reasoning available for systematic analysis.

Option D:
Option D, arthapatti, is postulation, where a new fact is hypothesised to reconcile apparently inconsistent data. While it can resemble inference, traditional schools distinguish it from ordinary sign-based anumana.

Anumana is defined as knowledge that follows from the recognition of a sign and its universal concomitance with what is to be proved. When we see smoke and recall that wherever there is smoke there is fire, we infer the presence of fire by anumana. It is therefore a mediate form of cognition depending on prior knowledge of vyapti. The description in the stem fits this inferential process exactly.

Option A:
Option A, upamana, yields knowledge by comparison and similarity, not by a sign–probandum relation grounded in vyapti. It relies on resemblance rather than on an established universal connection.

Option B:
Option B, sabda, is verbal testimony, a distinct pramana in which words of a reliable authority produce knowledge. It does not operate through a linga–sadhya relation.

Option C:
Option C is correct because anumana is the standard Indian term for inference based on a reason or sign. It captures the idea of drawing a conclusion about an unperceived entity from perceived evidence.

Option D:
Option D, arthapatti, or postulation, is a pramana recognised especially in Mimamsa where a new fact is posited to reconcile apparently conflicting data. It is not the same as ordinary sign-based inference.