UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

Kevalanvayi inference rests on vyapti that is affirmed solely through cases of joint presence; there is no instance where the hetu occurs apart from the sadhya. Thus only positive concomitance is used to secure the relation. A classic example is inferring “pot is nameable” from “pot is knowable” when all knowables are nameable. Hence the pattern described in the stem is kevalanvayi.

Option A:
Option A, kevalavyatireki, relies only on negative instances where both hetu and sadhya are absent together and has no positive sapaksha cases, the opposite emphasis from kevalanvayi.

Option B:
Option B, anvayavyatireki, uses both positive and negative instances together to establish vyapti and is broader than the purely positive case discussed here.

Option C:
Option C, samanyatodrsta, is a different classification based on general regularity, not on whether vyapti is known from positive or negative instances.

Option D:
Option D is correct because kevalanvayi literally means “only by affirmative concomitance,” which matches the condition of having no counter-instance of hetu without sadhya.