मानसार शिल्पशास्त्र (प्रसन्ना कुमार आचार्य - प्राचीन भारतीय स्थापत्य, नगर-नियोजन व मूर्ति-शिल्प महाकोश)

xx PREFACE
This method has the merit of satisfying the two divergent schools
of critics, namely, scholars who are in favour of an intelligent
discrimination between what are different readings and what are
mere blunders due to ignorance of authors or negligence of copyists,
and those who insist upon a faithful reproduction of even the most
obvious and unquestionable mistakes.
Working on this principle, such emendations as have been thought
indispensable for the constitution of an intelligible text have been
invariably marked as such both in the text, within brackets as is
usually done in editing an ancient inscription, and also in the Notes,
and the actual readings of all the manuscripts have been carefully
recorded. But I have kept in view the risks with which any attempt
at emendation is beset in the case of so difficult a text as the Mānasāra
and have accordingly endeavoured to exercise the utmost caution.
For the same reason, I have abstained from suggesting conjectural
restorations for all the passages in which the text, as found in the
Codex Archetypus, showed a lacuna, except where it could be restored
from the nature of the context or by reference to related passages
with a reasonable degree of certainty.
Under the circumstances pointed out in the description of the
existing manuscripts, ‘I’ is the only possible basis of this edition.
From this a departure has been made in favour of ‘J’ only where the
reading of the latter appeared distinctly preferable and to represent
a close approach to the original. In every such case the text of
‘I’ and all other manuscripts has been carefully indicated in the
Notes. This has also been done in every instance where the text
of ‘I’ had for the sake of elucidation to be corrected by any
other manuscripts. Whenever the readings of ‘I’ seemed to be
superior or equal to the variations of ‘J,’ and accordingly were
retained in the text, the readings of ‘J’ have been recorded in the
Notes. All words or letters, which ‘J’ or any other codex has
supplied, where ‘I’ had a lacuna or otherwise, have been distinctly
noted.