Manasara Series (I. A Dictionary of Hindu Architecture; II. Indian Architecture according to Manasara-Shilpashastra; III. Manasara on Architecture and Sculpture: Sanskrit Text; IV. Architecture of Manasara: Translation; V. Architecture of Manasara: Illustrations; VI. Hindu Architecture in India and Abroad; VII. An Encyclopaedia of Hindu Architecture) v2.c15.s3.18

v2.c15.s3.18

An objection may be raised here. It is possible that those works which are stated above to have been debtors to the *Mānasāra* might have been influenced directly by those which are asserted to have been the creditors to the *Mānasāra*. Such an objection, however, can be easily disposed of. The *Mānasāra*, in whichever period of history it is finally placed, has become a standard work on architecture and sculpture, because we have seen, first, it is the largest of its kind, secondly, its treatment of the subjects is most exhaustive, and thirdly, in it the subject-matter has been scientifically classified and systematised And when there is a standard work existing, it is natural and highly probable that those who treat the subject rather casually or less exhaustively, should draw upon it instead of going to the original sources except in some special instances. For the ordinary meanings or synonyms of a word we generally consult a standard dictionary, rather than attempt to trace the history, phonology, morphology, and semasiology of the word. An analogical instance may perhaps make the point clearer. Pāṇini’s grammar makes mention of some nineteen pre-existing grammatical works, and it has been placed by later scholars somewhere in the fourth or third century of the pre-Christian era. Like the works on rhetoric and prosody, grammars cannot be prepared without consulting the existing literature, because the sole business of these works is to generalise certain regulating features of literature. The methods of the pioneers of law books, as well as the grammar, the *Alaṅkāra Śāstra*, and the *Śilpa-Śāstra*, must have been inductive. Pāṇini, as he acknowledges generously, has been indebted to his predecessors; it is also clear from his work that he himself has consulted the preceding Vedic and post-Vedic literature. It is true that grammars have been prepared after Pāṇini also. But when Pāṇini's grammar reached the status of a standard work, his rules and regulations were naturally followed in the later literature. The later grammarians also must have been influenced by Pāṇini. In the field of grammar and literature Pāṇini's grammar is, therefore, the regulating and controlling standard work. In the same way, and more clearly and significantly, it seems to me, the *Mānasāra* occupies a unique position in literature, both architectural and non-architectural.