Kohala in the Sanskrit textual tradition (Study)
by Padma Sugavanam | 2011 | 95,782 words
This page relates 鈥楰ohala and Natya (8): Katha and Akhyayika鈥� of the thesis dealing with Kohala鈥檚 contribution to the Sanskrit textual tradition of ancient Indian performing arts. The study focuses specifically on music (Gita), dance (Nritya), and drama (Natya). Although Kohala鈥檚 original works have not been found, numerous references to him across Lakshana-Granthas (treatises) and works by modern scholars indicate his significance.
Go directly to: Footnotes.
Kohala and N膩峁瓂a (8): 碍补迟丑腻 and 膧办丑测腻测颈办腻
啶曕啶灌げ啶距啶距ぐ啷嵿く啶� 啶啶ㄠぐ啷囙さ啶ぞ啶光��
啶啶班が啶ㄠ啶о啶侧啶え啶距く啶距 啶啶班ぞ啶曕 啶膏い啷嵿く啶距 啶膏啶溹啶炧ぞ啶� 啶曕ぅ啶距 啶掂た啶︵啶� 啷�
啶ぐ啶啶ぐ啶距ざ啷嵿ぐ啶 啶じ啷嵿く啶距 啶膏ぞ 啶い啶距啷嵿く啶距く啶苦啶� 啶曕啶掂啶苦い啷� 啷� 啶囙い啶�kohal膩c膩rya岣� punarevam膩ha鈥�
辫谤补产补苍诲丑补办补濒辫补苍腻测腻峁� 辫谤腻办 蝉补迟测腻峁� 蝉补峁僯帽腻岣� 办补迟丑腻峁� 惫颈诲耻岣� |
parampar膩艣rayo yasy膩峁� s膩 mat腻办丑测腻测颈办腻 kvacit || iti鈥�(峁玨腻蝉补谤惫补蝉惫补, Comm. on 狈腻尘补濒颈峁単腻苍耻艣腻蝉补苍补尘)
In the above verse, 厂补谤惫腻苍补苍诲补 [author of the commentary 峁玨腻蝉补谤惫补蝉惫补 defines the terms 办补迟丑腻 and 腻办丑测腻测颈办腻 by quoting a verse of Kohala. 碍补迟丑腻 and 膧办丑测腻测颈办腻 refer to the different classes of a gadya 办腻惫测补 or a prose work. 顿补峁囜笉颈苍 in his work 碍腻惫测腻诲补谤艣补 gives the definitions of each of these. According to him, 办补迟丑腻 and 腻办丑测腻测颈办腻 have the following 濒补办峁峁嘺蝉[1].
| 碍补迟丑腻 | 膧办丑测腻测颈办腻 |
| i. The narration is made either by the hero or by someone else | i. The narration is made by the hero himself. In other words, this is an autobiography |
| ii. Chapters are called Lambakas | ii. Chapters are called 鲍肠肠丑惫腻蝉补蝉 |
| iii. 膧谤测补 and other metres are used | iii. Vaktra and Aparavaktra metres are used |
| iv. The mudra or 补峁卥补 of the author is not mandatory | iv. The mudra or 补峁卥补 of the author is mandatory |
| v. Cannot deal with subjects鈥�碍补苍测腻 丑补谤补峁嘺, 厂补峁単谤腻尘补, Vipralambha, 鲍诲补测腻苍惫颈迟补 | v. Deals with 碍补苍测腻 丑补谤补峁嘺, 厂补峁単谤腻尘补, Vipralambha, 鲍诲补测腻苍惫颈迟补 |
| vi. Should begin with a brief description of the author鈥檚 heredity in verse | vi. Should begin with an elaborate description of the author鈥檚 heredity in prose |
顿补峁囜笉颈苍 attacks each of these points claiming them to be artificial grounds for classification of a prose work. He also feels that the distinction between 办补迟丑腻 and 腻办丑测腻测颈办腻 is baseless and that the same entity is being called by two different names.
In this context, the definition that is found in 础尘补谤补办辞艣补, appears more sound:
啶啶班が啶ㄠ啶о啶侧啶え啶� 啶曕ぅ啶�, 啶嗋啷嵿く啶距く啶苦啶� 啶夃お啶侧が啷嵿ぇ啶距ぐ啷嵿ぅ啶�
prabandhakalpan膩 办补迟丑腻, 腻办丑测腻测颈办腻 upalabdh膩rth膩
碍补迟丑腻 is a story imagined by the poet, 膧办丑测腻测颈办腻 is a previously existing story retold. The commentator of 础尘补谤补办辞艣补 cites the above verse of Kohala in support of this opinion. Kohala also has defined 办补迟丑腻 as a story that has been imagined by the author and 腻办丑测腻测颈办腻 as the narration of a previously existing story which has come down in tradition.
There is no mention of the terms 办补迟丑腻 and 腻办丑测腻测颈办腻 in the 狈腻峁瓂补艣腻蝉迟谤补. This is because 狈腻峁瓂补艣腻蝉迟谤补 belongs to the arena dramatic performance and 办补迟丑腻 and 腻办丑测腻测颈办腻 to that of gadya 办腻惫测补s. It is difficult to say even whether the Kohala mentioned in 峁玨腻蝉补谤惫补蝉惫补 is the same as the one that Abhinava speaks of. There is only a single entry in the 峁玨腻蝉补谤惫补蝉惫补 which is rather insufficient to surmise that the Kohala in both these works refers to the same person. Authors who come under a particular tradition, usually follow a similar pattern of 耻诲诲别艣补 (contents / subjects discussed in the work). Therefore it does seem a little unlikely that Kohala, the 苍腻峁瓂腻肠腻谤测补 would have written on a subject pertaining to gadya.
Footnotes and references:
[1]:
碍腻惫测腻诲补谤艣补 of 顿补峁囜笉颈苍: 1959: V. 23-30: pp.31-32