Statements A, B, D and E correctly describe syÄdvÄda as conditional predication rooted in many-sidedness, whereas C is false. SyÄdvÄda does not deny meaningful discourse; it insists that meaningful statements be qualified by standpoint and respect, acknowledging the complexity of reality. The word āsyÄtā captures this conditionality, and its connection with anekÄntavÄda is a standard theme in Jain philosophy. UGC NET questions may explicitly contrast this with absolutist views that claim unqualified truth. So A, B, D, E only is the correct set.
Option A:
Option A is correct as it collects all accurate doctrinal and exam-related points while excluding C, which misinterprets syÄdvÄda as sceptical silence rather than responsible qualification. This matches mainstream presentations in Indian logic materials.
Option B:
Option B is incomplete because it omits D, leaving out the crucial connection to anekÄntavÄda, and thus A, B, E only does not fully characterise syÄdvÄda.
Option C:
Option C is wrong since it leaves out A and still does not identify C as false, and B, D, E only fails to mention that judgements are conditional from the outset, weakening the explanation.
Option D:
Option D is incorrect as it includes C, thereby suggesting that syÄdvÄda negates meaningful discourse, which contradicts its actual aim. A, C, D, E only therefore mixes a false claim with true ones.
Comment Your Answer
Please login to comment your answer.
Sign In
Sign Up
Answers commented by others
No answers commented yet. Be the first to comment!