365bet娱乐

From the references to Kohala that are found in primary and secondary published sources, the following aspects of Kohala are taken up for discussion.

1 Kohala as one of the 笔补帽肠补产丑补谤补迟补蝉

The concept of 辫补帽肠补产丑补谤补迟补 has been under debate for many decades.

艢膩rd膩tanaya mentions the existence of five Bharatas in his 叠丑腻惫补辫谤补办腻艣补苍补:

啶ㄠぞ啶熰�嵿く啶掂�囙う啶�啷嵿ぐ啶�啷嬥�曕�嵿い啶距ぐ啶� 啶�啶距ぐ啶む��啶膏す啶苦い啷嬥そ啶膏�嵿ぎ啶班い啷� 啷�
啶膏�嵿ぎ啷冟い啶�啶距い啷嵿ぐ啷� 啶�啷佮え啶苦�� 啶曕ざ啷嵿�氞た啶氞�嵿�涏た啶粪�嵿く啷堗�� 啶�啶炧�嵿�氞き啶苦ぐ啶ㄠ�嵿さ啶苦い啶� 啷�

苍腻峁瓂补vedaprayokt膩ra峁� bh膩rat墨sahito'smarat |
sm峁泃am膩tre muni岣� ka艣cicchi峁�yai岣� pa帽cabhiranvita岣� ||^[1]

He also mentions that there were two epitomes created out of the 狈腻峁瓂补惫别诲补, one containing 12000 艣濒辞办补蝉 (called the 鈥�顿惫腻诲补艣补蝉腻丑补蝉谤墨鈥�) and the other containing 6000 艣濒辞办补蝉 (called 鈥�峁�a峁璼腻丑补蝉谤墨鈥�). M. R. Kavi takes the above verse to mean that there are five Bharatas and attributes the 顿惫腻诲补艣补蝉腻丑补蝉谤墨 to a V峁沝dhabharata and 峁�a峁璼腻丑补蝉谤墨 to Bharata Muni. He feels that the latter is the present work of 狈腻峁瓂补艣腻蝉迟谤补. M. R. Kavi also supports this theory of the 辫补帽肠补产丑补谤补迟补s citing a reference from A岣峣y膩kkunall膩r鈥檚 commentary on the tamil classic 颁颈濒补辫辫补诲颈办腻谤补尘 saying that a work mentioned therein titled 鈥�笔补帽肠补产丑腻谤补迟墨测补尘鈥� could refer to the epitome of the works of the five Bharatas.

Bharata Muni and V峁沝dhabharata are two among the five. M. R. Kavi ventures a guess as to the identity of the other three. He says that they could refer to Kohala, Dattila and 碍腻艣测补辫补^[2]. Vinjimuri Varaha Narasimhachary also speaks of the concept of 笔补帽肠补产丑补谤补迟补蝉. But he gives us a new list of names viz. Kohala, Bharata, 狈补苍诲墨, Dattila and 惭补迟补峁単补^[3]. It is interesting to note that in this list Kohala is mentioned first, even before mentioning the name of Bharata. V. Raghavan dismisses this theory entirely as he feels there is not much evidence to support it. He cites some verses from the tenth chapter of 叠丑腻惫补辫谤补办腻艣补苍补, where there is reference to one sage and his five disciples. V. Raghavan interprets these 艣濒辞办补蝉 to mean that there were not five but six Bharatas if M. R. Kavi鈥檚 view was to be accepted^[4]. 

The mention of Kohala in this regard is of interest. Since the very inclusion of Kohala鈥檚 name among the 笔补帽肠补产丑补谤补迟补蝉 is based on speculation, also since scholars have contradictory views on this subject and more importantly, due to the absolute lack of any literary evidence to this effect, it cannot be said with any degree of certainty as to whether or not Kohala was one among the 笔补帽肠补产丑补谤补迟补蝉.

2 Kohala

A 狈补峁璦 and 狈腻峁瓂腻肠腻谤测补 On an evaluation of the information we can obtain from secondary sources, we come to know is that Kohala was a highly revered and venerated 狈腻峁瓂腻肠腻谤测补. He was not just an 腻肠腻谤测补 but was also an accomplished actor himself. Several subsequent authors on 蝉补峁単墨迟补, 苍峁泃测补, 苍腻峁瓂补 and rhetoric have quoted from Kohala and seem to hold him in very great esteem. Abhinavagupta too seems to have had high regard for Kohala and his doctrines as he quotes from Kohala on several aspects of 驳墨迟补, 苍峁泃测补, rhetoric and 苍腻峁瓂补.

On a personal note, Abhinavagupta portrays him as an ideal na峁璦.

啶�啷嵿ぐ啶灌�嵿ぎ啷囙さ 啶曕さ啶苦��, 啶多�曕�嵿ぐ 啶囙さ 啶�啷嵿ぐ啶�啷嬥�溹く啶苦い啶�, 啶�啶班�� 啶囙さ 啶ㄠぞ啶熰�嵿く啶距�氞ぞ啶班�嵿く啶�, 啶曕�嬥す啶侧ぞ啶︵�� 啶囙さ 啶ㄠ�熰ぞ啶�

brahmeva 办补惫颈岣�, 艣补办谤补 iva prayojayit膩, bharata iva n膩峁瓂腻肠腻谤测补岣�, kohal膩daya iva 苍补峁�膩岣�^[5]

And also an excellent n峁泃t腻肠腻谤测补鈥�

啶多�傕え啷嵿く啶�啶距じ啷嵿さ啶班さ啶苦う啷嵿く啷佮う啶距う啷嵿く啶�啶苦え啶�啶掂た啶粪く啷� 啶ㄠ�冟い啷嵿い啶距�氞ぞ啶班�嵿く啶�啷嵿ぐ啶掂ぞ啶灌じ啶苦う啷嵿ぇ啶� 啶曕�嬥す啶侧げ啶苦�栢た啶む�嬥そ啶�啶� 啶灌じ啷嵿い啶� 啶膏�權�嵿�椸い啷� 啶�啶掂い啷�啶むた 啶灌じ啷嵿い啶距え啶ㄠ�嵿い啶班ぞ啶｀�嵿く啷佮い啷嵿お啷嵿ぐ啷囙�曕�嵿し啶距ぃ啶� 啷�

艣奴nyabh膩svaravidyud膩dyabhinayavi峁�aye n峁泃t腻肠腻谤测补prav膩hasiddha岣� kohalalikhito'pi 丑补蝉迟补岣� sa峁単ato bhavat墨ti hast膩nantar膩峁噛utprek峁Ｄ佱箛i |^[6]

The poet 搁腻箩补艣别办丑补谤补 puts this reputation of Kohala鈥檚 to use by introducing Kohala as a character in his drama titled 鈥�叠腻濒补谤腻尘腻测补峁嘺尘鈥�. This drama tells the story of 搁腻尘补 from the 蝉惫补测补峁僾补谤补 of 厂墨迟腻 till the death of 搁腻惫补峁嘺 and the journey of 搁腻尘补 along with 厂墨迟腻 back to 础测辞诲丑测腻. The third act of this play is called 鈥�痴颈濒补办峁�a濒补峁卥别艣惫补谤补鈥�. In this act, 搁腻尘补 and 尝补办峁�m补峁嘺 kill 罢腻岣峚办腻 and 厂耻产腻丑耻 and hurt 惭腻谤墨肠补. On the other hand 搁腻惫补峁嘺 is unable to forget 厂墨迟腻 and her breathtaking beauty. He tries in vain to divert his mind from the pangs of his infatuation. He then hears about a play called 鈥�厂墨迟腻蝉惫补测补峁僾补谤补鈥� performed by Bharat腻肠腻谤测补 and his troupe in the 蝉补产丑腻 of Devendra. 搁腻惫补峁嘺 eager to see even a likeness of 厂墨迟腻, invites the troupe to present the same play in 尝补峁卥腻. The entire troupe consisting of the hundred sons of Bharata and 补辫蝉补谤腻蝉 reaches 尝补峁卥腻. The enactment of the play is presented in the form of a 鈥�惭颈艣谤补惫颈峁�k补尘产丑补办补鈥�. In the 驳补谤产丑腻峁卥补 of 鈥�厂墨迟腻蝉惫补测补峁僾补谤补鈥� enters Kohala in the role of the 厂奴迟谤补诲丑腻谤补 / 碍补帽肠耻办墨^[7]. He presents the 苍腻苍诲墨 and proceeds to admire the hall and the beautiful ambience. Next, he indicates the entry of (the main characters) 痴颈艣惫腻尘颈迟谤补, 搁腻尘补 and 尝补办峁�m补峁嘺 and leaves the stage. 搁腻箩补艣别办丑补谤补 has in this manner presented Kohala as an actor / character in his play. Another instance of Kohala being called an actor is seen in the work 碍耻峁�峁�补苍墨尘补迟补尘 of 顿腻尘辞诲补谤补.

Here, the author portrays Bharata as the hero, Kohala (and others) as the 办耻艣墨濒补惫补蝉 (actors), the 补辫蝉补谤腻蝉 as the feminine characters and the sons of Brahma as the musicians.

啶ㄠぞ啶�啶曕き啷傕ぎ啷� 啶�啶班い啶� 啶曕�佮ざ啷�啶侧さ啶距�� 啶曕�嬥す啶侧ぞ啶︵く啷� 啶�啷佮え啶�啶� 啷�
啶呧お啷嵿じ啶班じ啶� 啶膏�嵿い啷嵿ぐ啷�啶ㄠぞ啶熰�嵿く啷� 啶椸ぞ啶ㄠ�嵿ぇ啶班�嵿さ啷� 啶曕ぎ啶侧�溹え啷嵿ぎ啶ㄠじ啷嵿い啶ㄠく啶� 啷� 啷�啷�啷� 啷�

苍腻测补办补产丑奴尘补耻 产丑补谤补迟补岣� ku艣墨lav膩岣� kohal膩dayo 尘耻苍补测补岣� |
apsarasa岣� str墨n膩峁瓂e g膩ndharve kamalajanmanastanaya岣� || 876 ||^[8]

3 Kohala

鈥擜 Grammarian There appears to be a 辫谤腻办峁泃补 grammarian of the name Kohala. In fact, 惭腻谤办补峁囜笉别测补鈥檚 invocatory 艣濒辞办补 in his work 笔谤腻办峁泃补蝉补谤惫补蝉惫补 puts Kohala alongside Bharata and 艢腻办补濒测补 as one the earliest 辫谤腻办峁泃补 grammarians.

啶多ぞ啶曕げ啷嵿く-啶�啶班��-啶曕�嬥す啶�-啶掂ぐ啶班�佮�氞た-啶掂じ啶ㄠ�嵿い啶班ぞ啶溹ぞ啶︵�嵿く啷堗�� 啷�
啶�啷嵿ぐ啷嬥�曕�嵿い啶距え啷� 啶椸�嵿ぐ啶ㄠ�嵿ぅ啶距え啷� 啶ㄠぞ啶ㄠぞ啶侧�曕�嵿し啷嵿く啶距ぃ啶� 啶� 啶ㄠた啶�啷佮ぃ啶�啶距げ啷嬥�曕�嵿く 啷�
啶呧さ啷嵿く啶距�曕��啶班�嵿ぃ啶� 啶掂た啶多う啶� 啶膏ぞ啶班�� 啶膏�嵿さ啶侧�嵿お啶距�曕�嵿し啶班�椸�嵿ぐ啶ムた啶むお啶︵�嵿く啶�啷� 啷�
啶�啶距ぐ啷嵿�曕ぃ啷嵿ぁ啷囙く啶曕さ啷�啶ㄠ�嵿う啷嵿ぐ啶� 啶�啷嵿ぐ啶距�曕�冟い啶膏ぐ啷嵿さ啶膏�嵿さ啶�啶距ぐ啶�啶む�� 啷�

艣膩kalya-bharata-kohala-vararuci-vasantar膩j膩dyai岣� |
prokt膩n granth膩n n膩n膩lak峁�y膩峁噄 ca nipu峁嘺m膩lokya ||
avy膩k墨r峁嘺峁� vi艣ada峁� s膩ra峁� svalp膩k峁�aragrathitapadyam |
m膩rka峁囜笉eyakav墨ndra岣� 辫谤腻办峁泃补sarvasvam膩rabhate ||^[9]

R. Pischel gives us views of Kohala on the 惭腻驳补诲丑颈 dialect as opposed to those of Bharata^[10]. He also mentions that this Kohala might have been identical with the Kohala who was a writer on music.

4 Kohala鈥擬ythological Personality

There is many a mythological story regarding Kohala. Many times, Kohala is depicted in conjunction with another well-known ancient personality such as Dattila, 惭补迟补峁単补 etc. Some of these are presented below: 

i. There is mention of a Kahola (碍补丑辞岣峚) who is the father of 础峁ａ弓腻惫补办谤补, in the epic 惭补丑腻产丑腻谤补迟补^[11]. In the T墨rthay膩tr膩 parva of Vana Parva, there is a mention of their story. Kahola was a disciple of the sage 鲍诲诲腻濒补办补. Pleased with the devotion of his disciple, the sage offers Kahola the hand of his daughter 厂耻箩腻迟腻 in marriage. When 厂耻箩腻迟腻 was pregnant with their son, the child cries out to the father from the womb saying that he was making eight mistakes while chanting the Vedic verses. Angered and humiliated by the child鈥檚 statement in front of his own disciples, Kahola curses the child to be born with eight deformities in its eight limbs. This child was called 础峁ａ弓腻惫补办谤补.

ii. Mukund Lath mentions an account of Dattila and Kohala being the sons of 惭补迟补峁単补 in the 蝉迟丑补濒补辫耻谤腻峁嘺 of 艢r墨mu峁ａ箛am (South Arcot district, Tamil Nadu)^[12]. According to this tradition, Dattila and Kohala married 艢耻办濒腻 and 碍峁涐梗峁嚹�, the daughters of 闯丑颈濒濒颈办腻.

These sisters transformed themselves into rivers so as to serve 驰补箩帽补惫补谤腻丑补, the presiding deity of 艢r墨mu峁ａ箛am.

啶多�佮�曕�嵿げ啶� 啶曕�冟し啷嵿ぃ啷囙い啶� 啶ㄠう啷嵿く啷� 啶︵�嵿さ啷� 啶掂た啶�啶距え啶距う啷佮い啷嵿い啶班�� 啶多�佮き啷� 啷�
啶澿た啶侧�嵿げ啶苦�曕ぞ啶むえ啶�啷� 啶�啷佮ぃ啷嵿く啷� 啶�啶む�權�嵿�椸じ啷嵿く 啶膏�嵿え啷佮し啷� 啶夃き啷� 啷�
啶むく啷嬥�� 啶�啶む�� 啶� 啶掂た啶栢�嵿く啶距い啷� 啶︵い啷嵿い啶苦げ啶� 啶曕�嬥す啶侧�嬥そ啶�啶� 啶� 啷�
啶�啶む�權�嵿�椸じ啷嵿く 啶�啷佮え啷囙�� 啶�啷佮い啷嵿ぐ啷� 啶椸��啶むざ啶距じ啷嵿い啷嵿ぐ啶掂た啶多ぞ啶班う啷� 啷�
啶むく啷嬥�� 啶�啶む�嵿え啷嵿く啷� 啶� 啶む�� 啶ㄠう啷嵿く啷� 啶澿た啶侧�嵿げ啶苦�曕ぞ啶むえ啶�啷� 啶夃き啷� 啷�
啶曕�嬥げ啶︵�囙さ啶膏�嵿�� 啶�啷傕�溹ぞ啶班�嵿ぅ啶� 啶ㄠう啷�啶班�傕お啶�啶掂ぞ啶�啶む�佮�� 啷�

艣ukl膩 k峁涐梗峁噀ti nadyau dve vim膩n膩duttare 艣ubhe |
jhillik膩tanaye pu峁噛e mata峁単asya snu峁�e ubhe ||
tayo岣� pat墨 ta vikhy膩tau dattila岣� kohalo'pi ca |
mata峁単asya mune岣� putrau 驳墨迟补艣膩stravi艣膩radau ||
tayo岣� patnyau ca tau nadyau jhillik膩tanaye ubhe ||
koladevasya p奴j膩rtha峁� nad墨r奴pamav膩patu岣� ||^[13]

In this excerpt, 惭补迟补峁単补, Dattila and Kohala are brought together in a family relationship. The verses also make it clear that the Dattila and Kohala that they are referring to are authorities on 驳墨迟补. What is interesting is that 惭补迟补峁単补, who is accepted as a much later author compared to Dattila and Kohala, is mentioned as their father. 

iii. Mukund Lath recounts a pur膩nic legend from the Skanda 辫耻谤腻峁嘺.

鈥淧谤辞辫辞耻苍诲颈苍驳 the greatness of the summer month of 痴补颈艣腻办丑补 (惫补颈艣腻办丑补尘腻丑腻迟尘测补) and the special merit occurring from good deeds done in this month, the 惫补颈峁ａ箛补惫补办丑补峁囜笉补 of the skanda 辫耻谤腻峁嘺 (in the seventh section concerning 惫补颈艣腻办丑补尘腻丑腻迟尘测补 of this 办丑补峁囜笉补, chapter 17) records the following story: A certain 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 named 艢补峁卥丑补 went in the month of 惫补颈艣腻办丑补 into a waterless jungle in order to do 迟补辫补蝉测腻 (penance). At noon one day when the sun was exceedingly hot, 艢补峁卥丑补 took shelter from the heat under a tree. Here a 惫测腻诲丑补鈥攁 professional hunter鈥攅spied him and observed that 艢补峁卥丑补 was wearing golden earrings and had some other small belongings which hermits usually carry, such as a 办补尘补峁囜笉补濒耻, a garland made of 补办峁�a seeds and also a pair of shoes. The 惫测腻诲丑补 pounced on 艢补峁卥丑补 and robbed him of these things and then ordered him to run away. 艢补峁卥丑补 started walking away, but without shoes the burning sands of mid-day felt like scorching fire and he was forced to move extremely slowly. He kept trying to put his feet on such spots as had some grass left on them. The 惫测腻诲丑补 observed 艢补峁卥丑补鈥檚 extreme discomfort and was moved to some pity. He gave 艢补峁卥丑补 his own pair of tattered shoes (耻辫腻苍补丑补). At this, 艢补峁卥丑补 profusely thanked him and said that this good deed will earn him exceedingly great merit, especially as it was done in the month of 惫补颈艣腻办丑补. 痴测腻诲丑补 then questioned 艢补峁卥丑补 about the greatness of 惫补颈艣腻办丑补 and while 艢补峁卥丑补 was answering him, a lion came out and attacked the 惫测腻诲丑补. But suddenly an elephant appeared before the lion and the two animals engaged one another in a fight. The fight continued till they were exhausted and drew apart, yet they still kept glaring at one another with anger. As it happened, the 惫补颈艣腻办丑测补尘腻丑腻迟尘测补 which 艢补峁卥丑补 was propounding to 惫测腻诲丑补, fell on their beastly ears and they were immediately freed from the bondage of their animal state and became transformed into divine beings. Questioned, they explained that they were actually two brothers Dattila and Kohala, sons of the sage 惭补迟补峁単补. Their father had turned them into beasts when they disapproved of his setting up a watershed (辫谤补辫腻) for thirsty travellers in the month of 惫补颈艣腻办丑补 (Skanda辫耻谤腻峁嘺, 痴补颈峁ａ箛补惫补-办丑补峁囜笉补, 痴补颈艣腻办丑补m膩h膩tmya, ch.17)鈥�^[14].

It is interesting to note that even in this instance Dattila and Kohala are said to be sons of 惭补迟补峁単补. Ganga Ram Garg also mentions that Kohala is the son of 惭补迟补峁単补^[15], but this does not coincide with current musicological theories.

In Indian literature, it is a common practice for personas of great eminence, in course of time, to be elevated to divine/ demi-God/ super-human stature. In this vein one can relate to mythological stories such as the ones presented above. Whether the incidents mentioned in these actually happened cannot be known today. But, in the case of Kohala, it seems to be a very common practice even in the musicological field to associate him with one or another 腻肠腻谤测补 / sage, In fact a work called 顿补迟迟颈濒补办辞丑补濒墨测补尘 is attributed to the common authorship of Dattila and Kohala. Therefore it is not surprising to find the two of them being represented together (as brothers) in a mythological story.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

叠丑腻惫补辫谤补办腻艣补苍补 of 艢膩rad膩tanaya: 1968: p.285

[2]:

Literature on Music:1928: Vol.III Part I: p.24

[3]:

The Early Writers On Music: 1930: p.193

[4]:

Collected writings on music: 2007: Vol. II: pg 72

[5]:

狈腻峁瓂补艣腻蝉迟谤补 of Bharatamuni: 1992: Comm. on 2.1: GOS Vol. I: p. 47

[6]:

狈腻峁瓂补艣腻蝉迟谤补 of Bharatamuni: 2001: Comm. on 9.4-6: GOS Vol. II: p.26

[7]:

叠腻濒补谤腻尘腻测补峁嘺尘:1995: p. 92

[8]:

碍耻峁�峁�补苍墨尘补迟补尘: 1991: p.336

[9]:

The Prakrita Grammarians: 1972: p.96

[10]:

Comparitive grammar of the 笔谤腻办峁泃 languages: 1957: p.24

[11]:

艢谤墨尘补苍尘补丑腻产丑腻谤补迟补尘: 1972: V.3: p. 564

[12]:

A Study of Dattilam: 1978: p.438

[13]:

History of Classical Sanskrit Literature:1974: p.824

[14]:

A Study of Dattilam: 1978: pp.438-439

[15]:

An Encylopedia of Indian Literature: 1982: p.189