365bet娱乐

The Abhinavabharatas膩rasa峁単raha [Abhinavabharata-s膩rasa峁僩raha] (1660-1670 C.E.) of Mumma岣峣 Cikkabh奴p膩la contains two references to Kohala. In the first instance, the author quotes a verse of Kohala on the classification of musical instruments (ref.para 2.1.16). This is found at the very outset of this work. Cikkabh奴p膩la also cites the views Bharata, Harip膩la, Dattila and 狈腻谤补诲补. The order in which these authors have been quoted is interesting. Cikkabh奴p膩la cites 贬补谤颈辫腻濒补诲别惫补鈥檚 views immediately after Bharata and then follows it with that of Dattila. Bharata and Dattila belong to the period between 2nd century B.C.E. and 2nd century C.E., whereas Harip膩la is a 14th century C.E. author. The reason for Cikkabh奴p膩la adopting this order (Bharata-贬补谤颈辫腻濒补诲别惫补-Dattila-Kohala-狈腻谤补诲补) of citation is not clear. According to him, Kohala has classified instruments into five categories viz. 蝉耻峁�i谤补, ghana, carmabaddha, 迟补苍迟谤墨 and 驳腻苍补. The addition of 驳腻苍补 (human voice) as an instrument is noteworthy. The other four classes are commonly mentioned by several authors. It is not clear which work of Kohala, Cikkabh奴p膩la had access to, as this is the only citation of Kohala鈥檚 that he presents in his work. If indeed he had the work of the earliest Kohala (contemporary of Bharata), then he would perhaps be the earliest author to include the human voice into the classes of instruments.

Another citation of Kohala in this work is on the subject of 尘奴谤肠肠丑补苍腻 (ref.para 2.1.4.3). Cikkabh奴p膩la quotes this from 厂补峁単墨迟补蝉耻诲丑腻办补谤补 of Harip膩la and a work of Tumburu. According to Haripasla, Kohala has defined 尘奴谤肠肠丑补苍腻 as a scale with seven notes, he says there are twenty one 尘奴谤肠肠丑补苍腻s鈥� seven for each 驳谤腻尘补. This would imply that Kohala, has accepted the g膩ndh膩ra 驳谤腻尘补. On the other hand, the definition of Tumburu is more of a general nature and does not speak of any technical details regarding the subject.

But as we have seen in earlier paragraphs, most authors post-搁补迟苍腻办补谤补 have painted a very different picture of Kohala compared to what has been said by authors like 惭补迟补峁単补 and Abhinavagupta. Considering Cikkabh奴p膩la belonged to the 17th century C.E. it is very likely that he had access to one of the works of a later Kohala or sourced is material from some other work (for instance like 厂补峁単墨迟补蝉耻诲丑腻办补谤补) from which he generously draws material.