मानसार शिल्पशास्त्र (प्रसन्ना कुमार आचार्य - प्राचीन भारतीय स्थापत्य, नगर-नियोजन व मूर्ति-शिल्प महाकोश)
Manasara on Architecture and Sculpture by P.K. Acharya
मानसार ऋषि (अनुवादक: डॉ. प्रसन्ना कुमार आचार्य) द्वारा
पृष्ठ 21, कुल 856 में से
संदर्भ में पढ़ेंxcii PREFACE
(11) In the instances of wrong cases, mostly the nominative
and accusative have been corrected and marked within
brackets, and the rest have been rarely corrected.
(12) In cases of wrong numbers, singular for plural or dual, and
vice versa, and false genders, masculine words treated as
if they were neuter or feminine, and vice versa, alterations
can hardly be suggested without considerably handling
the text. Wherever they are found indispensable, they
are marked within brackets and noticed in the Notes.
(13) Masculine or neuter forms of accusatives and pronouns
used with reference to feminine nouns have been similarly
noticed.
(14) Similar alterations have been made of words in sandhi
and compounds, where the elementary rules of grammar
are violated in a large number of instances without
following a discoverable fixed principle.
(15) Inappropriate or incorrect verbal derivatives have been,
as a rule, treated in the same way, the alterations,
whenever suggested, being marked within brackets.
These matters are elaborately discussed and fully illus-
trated in the writer's Indian Architecture under "The
Language of the Śilpa-śāstra" (pages 199-214).
Signs : ( ) indicates a correct form to replace an incorrect one which
immediately precedes it ; [ ] indicates an emendation by
an addition, omission, or alteration of letters or words.
I feel no hesitation in declaring that a perfect text of the
Mānasāra written in a chaste language is unattainable. It is
unlikely that there still exist manuscripts, which are hitherto undis-
covered and which are not derived from any of our manuscripts. I
am, therefore, of opinion that the Mānasāra was never written in
a chaste language and that its imperfections are original.¹
¹ A few critics questioned if Sanskrit (the refined) language of the Śilpa-śāstra, the science of
fine arts, could ever have been 'barbarous'; one such critic is dead and gone, and if there be yet any-
body left he will have now an opportunity of examining the text for himself and revising his notion
(see Opinions and Reviews at the end of Vol. IV).