UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

Statements A, B, C and E give a correct overview of syādvāda, while D and F are false. Syādvāda and saptabhaṅgī emphasise that predications are made from particular standpoints, so apparently opposite claims can both be conditionally true. This does not amount to radical scepticism but to a nuanced, many-sided account of truth. UGC NET usually tests the general idea of conditional predication rather than requiring exhaustive enumeration of all seven forms. Therefore A, B, C and E only is the correct combination.

Option A:
Option A is correct because it captures both the conceptual core of syādvāda and its exam-level treatment without endorsing the extremes stated in D and F. It recognises the relativity of statements without denying the possibility of knowledge. This matches how Jaina logic is typically presented in Paper 1 materials.

Option B:
Option B is incorrect since it includes D, which claims unconditional absolute truth from all standpoints, contradicting the very idea of syādvāda. Syādvāda insists on conditionality rather than absolute unconditional claims. Including D therefore makes the option unsound.

Option C:
Option C is wrong as it incorporates F, which mislabels syādvāda as pure scepticism, and it omits A, so the central role of “syāt” is no longer stated. Without A and with F, the nature of Jaina logic is distorted.

Option D:
Option D is also incorrect because it includes F and omits B, thereby losing explicit reference to the sevenfold scheme while accepting a false characterisation of the doctrine. This combination cannot be chosen as correct.

Statements A, B, C and F correctly describe vyāpti in Indian logic, while D and E are false. Vyāpti captures the necessary connection between hetu and sādhya discovered through repeated observation and the ruling out of counterinstances. Nyaya treats this relation as the essential ground of any valid inference, and the smoke–fire example is frequently used in teaching and exams. D is wrong because a single coincidence does not establish invariable concomitance, and E is wrong because Nyaya does not regard vyāpti as purely a priori; empirical observation and reasoning are both involved.

Option A:
Option A is incomplete since it omits F, leaving out the specific exam-oriented reference to the smoke–fire example that often illustrates vyāpti. While A, B and C are true, they do not fully reflect how the concept is used pedagogically. Therefore A, B and C only is not entirely adequate.

Option B:
Option B is incorrect because it includes D, which claims that one accidental co-occurrence is enough to secure vyāpti, contradicting the insistence on repeated, exceptionless observation. Including D invalidates the combination. Hence A, B, C and D only cannot be accepted.

Option C:
Option C is correct because it gathers the core definitional and methodological points along with the common example used in UGC NET materials, while excluding D and E, both of which misrepresent the nature of vyāpti. Thus A, B, C and F only is the right answer.

Option D:
Option D is wrong as it omits A and includes only B, C and F, leaving out the very definition of vyāpti as invariable concomitance. Without A, the candidate would not know what relation is being discussed. Therefore B, C and F only cannot be the correct choice.