365bet娱乐

There are two references to Kohala in Sa峁単墨ta蝉奴谤测辞诲补测补 [厂补峁僩墨迟补-蝉奴谤测辞诲补测补] (1509-1529 C.E.) of 尝补办峁�m墨苍腻谤腻测补峁嘺. One is relating to the 苍峁泃迟补 hastas (ref.para 2.2.3.2). After listing out all the 苍峁泃迟补 hastas, the author cites Kohala saying that he prescribes these to be used for abhinaya also. The other is a description of the 辫补帽肠补迟腻濒别艣惫补谤补 prabandha (ref.para 2.1.11.2). The author gives a detailed account of the 辫补帽肠补迟腻濒别艣惫补谤补 prabandha, mostly on the lines of 艢腻谤峁単补诲别惫补. He prescribes the rendition of the 耻诲驳谤腻丑补 towards the end of the prabandha. In this context, he mentions that there is an optional usage of 辫谤补迟颈迟腻濒补 for the first two padas and dhruva 迟腻濒补 for the subsequent three. This according to him is on the authority of Kohala. 

Interestingly, Kallin膩tha already describes the rendition of the 耻诲驳谤腻丑补 in the same manner. But he does not mention the name of Kohala in this context. It appears that 尝补办峁�m墨苍腻谤腻测补峁嘺 has drawn his material from Kallin膩tha. Perhaps, he (尝补办峁�m墨苍腻谤腻测补峁嘺) did not wish to acknowledge him (Kallin膩tha) and instead attributed the same to Kohala, by doing which he perhaps hoped to add some more credibility and authority to his words. A similar approach is also seen in 厂补峁単墨迟补蝉耻诲丑腻, where Govinda D墨k峁�ita paraphrases verses of 艢腻谤峁単补诲别惫补. He too does not acknowledge 艢腻谤峁単补诲别惫补, but instead cites the names of ancient authorities like Bharata, Dattila, Kohala, 驰腻峁ａ弓颈办补 and others.

Prabandha is a concept that belongs to the 诲别艣墨 tradition. The mention of Kohala on this subject would indicate that he was an author who dealt with 诲别艣墨. However, the genuineness of this citation is questionable. Since the very authenticity of the link of this work to Kohala is under doubt, the role that it will play in understanding Kohala is consequently insignificant.