UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

A satpratipakṣa hetu faces an opponent’s reason of equal strength that supports the negation of the original sādhya. When both sides can marshal apparently adequate hetus and vyāptis for opposing theses, the original hetu loses its probative force. The presence of such a counter reason neutralises the inference, making the middle term defective for establishing a decisive conclusion.

Option A:
Option A would describe a completely irrelevant reason, not specifically one that is countered by an opposing inference; this is closer to an anaikāntika or unrelated hetu.

Option B:
Option B correctly expresses the idea that a satpratipakṣa arises when an equally strong middle term can be advanced on the opposite side, cancelling the evidential value of the original hetu.

Option C:
Option C suggests the hetu occurs only in vipakṣa, which indicates a different failure of trairūpya, not the presence of a rival counter hetu.

Option D:
Option D mentions perception, but a reason being based on perception is not by itself a defect; the problem in satpratipakṣa is symmetrical opposition, not the pramāṇa used.