UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

Statements A, B, C, D and E accurately describe the core roles of pakṣa, sādhya, hetu, sapakṣa and vipakṣa, whereas F is false. The hill–smoke–fire example neatly illustrates how these roles work together in an inference. Nyaya insists that the hetu must actually qualify the pakṣa; if the reason is absent there, the inference collapses. Sapakṣa and vipakṣa then help to test the reliability of the connection between hetu and sādhya in other cases. Hence F contradicts a basic requirement of Indian inference theory.

Option A:
Option A is incomplete because it omits E, failing to mention the important supporting notions of sapakṣa and vipakṣa that appear in many exam items. While A, B, C and D are correct, they do not fully capture the wider inferential context. Therefore A, B, C and D only is not a complete answer.

Option B:
Option B is wrong as it leaves out A and includes only B, C, D and E. Without A, the definition of pakṣa as the locus of inference is missing, even though it is central to the question. This omission means B, C, D and E only cannot be the correct combination.

Option C:
Option C is correct since it gathers all five true statements and excludes F, which wrongly allows a hetu that does not apply to the pakṣa. It presents the standard structure of Indian inference as taught in UGC NET syllabi. Hence A, B, C, D and E only is the appropriate answer.

Option D:
Option D is incorrect because it omits B, leaving out the definition of sādhya as the probandum, and includes only A, C, D and E. Without B, the description of the inferential triad is incomplete. As such, this option does not represent all the correct statements.

Statements A, B, C, E and F are correct, while D is incorrect. Pakṣa is indeed the subject where the probandum is to be shown, and vyāpti states the invariable relation between hetu and sādhya. Sapakṣa are positive instances with both reason and probandum, and a proper hetu must appear in all such cases and in none of the negative instances, vipakṣa. If hetu appears in vipakṣa, its exclusiveness is broken, making the reason fallacious. Statement D is wrong because vipakṣa are cases where the sādhya is absent and, for a proper hetu, the reason should also be absent there.

Option A:
Option A is incorrect because it omits F, thereby ignoring the important consequence that hetu’s presence in vipakṣa leads to a fallacy. While A, B, C and E describe key concepts, they do not mention what happens when the exclusiveness condition is violated. Thus A, B, C and E only cannot be the full set of correct statements.

Option B:
Option B is correct since it combines A, B, C, E and F, reflecting the standard Nyaya account of pakṣa, vyāpti, sapakṣa, vipakṣa and the condition of a proper hetu. It excludes D, which wrongly describes vipakṣa as places where hetu is present but sādhya is absent. The option therefore matches the real structure of Indian inference theory.

Option C:
Option C is wrong because it accepts D along with the other statements. By treating D as correct, it suggests that hetu is present in vipakṣa, which is the very situation that undermines the validity of the reason. Including D therefore makes this option inconsistent with the conditions for a proper hetu.

Option D:
Option D is incorrect since it drops B, a central explanation of vyāpti, and keeps A, C, E and F only. Without acknowledging vyāpti explicitly, the picture of inference is incomplete, and the presence of D’s error in other options confirms that this reduced set does not accurately represent all true statements.

Statements A, B, C, E and F correctly summarise the traditional conditions for a proper hetu, while D is false. The hetu must qualify the pakṣa, coincide with the sādhya in positive instances and be absent when the sādhya is absent, thereby supporting a reliable vyāpti. If any of these conditions fail, the middle term can become fallacious, which is what hetvābhāsa denotes. D is wrong because a sādhāraṇa hetu that spreads across vipakṣa as well is defective, not strong. UGC NET may test recognition of which condition is violated in sample inferences.

Option A:
Option A is correct since it includes the three core lakṣaṇas of a valid hetu, the connection to hetvābhāsa and the exam-oriented point about identifying violations. It excludes D, which elevates a defective sādhāraṇa hetu to a strong one, contradicting standard accounts. Thus this option accurately represents the set of correct statements.

Option B:
Option B is incomplete because it omits E and F, leaving out both the link to fallacious reasoning and the exam application. While A, B and C are true, they do not show what happens when the conditions fail or how they are tested. Therefore A, B and C only is not fully adequate.

Option C:
Option C is also incomplete as it leaves out F, the statement about UGC NET questions explicitly using these conditions. Without F, the answer does not reflect the way the topic appears in the syllabus. Hence A, B, C and E only cannot be the best choice.

Option D:
Option D is incorrect because it omits A and includes only B, C, E and F. Without A, the requirement that the hetu be present in the pakṣa itself is missing, which is fundamental. This omission means the option does not incorporate all the correct statements in the list.