UGCNET Questions

Nyaya logic describes a five-membered inferential structure consisting of pratijñā (proposition), hetu (reason), udāharaṇa or dṛṣṭānta (example), upanaya (application) and nigamana (conclusion). Pramāṇa, meaning means of valid knowledge, is an important epistemological category in Indian philosophy but is not listed as one of these five components of a single inferential act. Therefore, it does not belong in the avayava sequence.

Option A:
Option A, pratijñā, is indeed the first member, stating the thesis that is to be proved.

Option B:
Option B, hetu, gives the reason or ground for the thesis and is a recognised member of the five-part structure.

Option C:
Option C, dṛṣṭānta, provides a familiar example to illustrate the universal concomitance and is also part of the classical scheme.

Option D:
Option D names a broader notion related to sources of knowledge, not a specific segment of the fivefold inferential form, so it is the one that does not fit.

Nyāya describes a formal five-step pattern for anumāna: stating the thesis (pratijñā), giving the reason (hetu), citing an example that shows vyāpti (dṛṣṭānta), applying the universal to the minor term (upanaya) and finally drawing the conclusion (nigamana). This order moves from claim, to justification, to illustration, to application, and ends with a restated, now justified conclusion. The sequence in option C follows this traditional structure exactly.

Option A:
Option A incorrectly starts with the reason and then states the thesis, reversing the natural Nyāya order.

Option B:
Option B misplaces hetu after dṛṣṭānta, although the reason should precede the illustrative example in the usual pattern.

Option C:
Option C faithfully reproduces the textbook order of the five avayavas, reflecting the logical and pedagogical flow emphasised in Nyāya manuals.

Option D:
Option D starts with the example rather than the thesis, which does not match the standard presentation of the inferential sequence.