Abstract

Attempts have been made to correct the text of the Sarvadarśanasaṃgraha on the basis of the texts that its author used—and sometimes refers to by name—while composing his work. This procedure is promising in texts like the Sarvadarśanasaṃgraha, which makes abundant use of other works, and might in principle give results that are independent of, and prior to, the detailed study of its manuscripts. A closer investigation shows that this procedure is not without risks, and may occasionally give rise to unjustified “corrections”. The article shows that quotations in the Sarvadarśanasaṃgraha deviate from their source-texts in numerous cases. It further illustrates that the archetype underlying the manuscripts used for the available editions on occasion demonstrably differs from what must have been the text’s autograph. Other cases demonstrate that already the autograph sometimes deviated from its source-texts. The article concludes that careless “correcting” of the text may have serious consequences and can stand in the way of its correct interpretation.