Kohala in the Sanskrit textual tradition (Study)
by Padma Sugavanam | 2011 | 95,782 words
This page relates ‘Author and Date of Kohalarahasyam’ of the thesis dealing with Kohala’s 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’s original works have not been found, numerous references to him across Lakshana-Granthas (treatises) and works by modern scholars indicate his significance.
Part 1(b).3 - Author and Date of Kohalarahasyam
In the case of Kohalarahasya [Kohalarahasyam], there is a clear colophon indicating the title Kohalarahasyam and the concerned material being the thirteenth chapter of this work. To further support this argument, even the manuscripts of Kohalamatam contain a reference to the work Kohalarahasyam—“iti pūrvakohalarahasyam”. However, since the entire work is unavailable, and that Kohalarahasyam completely matches the material in Kohalamatam it is unclear as to the authenticity of the work Kohalarahasyam.
In addition to this, the name Kohala-rahasya [Kohalarahasyam] also appears in the commentary of Kuṭṭanīmatam of Dāmodara Gupta where Kohala is said to be the author of this work (Kohalarahasyam).
कोहलभरतौ नाट्याचार्यौ, तत्र कोहलः भरतपुत्रः कोहलरहस्यकर्ता । तदुक्तं तत्रैव—
सुखोपविष्टं वरदं कोहलं भरतात्मजम् ।
कृताञ्जलिपुटो भूत्वा मतङ्गः परिपृच्छति ॥ - इतिkohalabharatau nāṭyācāryau, tatra kohalaḥ bharataputraḥ kohalarahasyakartā | taduktaṃ tatraiva—
sukhopaviṣṭaṃ varadaṃ kohalaṃ bharatātmajam |
kṛtāñjalipuṭo bhūtvā mataṅgaḥ paripṛcchati || - iti—Kuṭṭanīmatam of Dāmodaragupta: 1991: p.16
Kohala being the author of this work, is arguable. Firstly, the Kohala-Mataṅga-saṃvāda, as discussed above, points towards the possibility of Kohala ‘not’ being the author of this work. This is because it appears unlikely that Kohala would write a book where he makes himself a party to the converstion, by means of which his work is being presented. Secondly, the subjects that are being dealt with here (i.e. classification of rāgas—into sūryāṃśa and candramāṃśa etc.), is a medieval one and finally, verses from works such as Saṅgītamakaranda and Saṅgītasamayasāra which belong to the 12th -16th century C.E. contain common text with Kohalararahasyam.
Based on the above facts, it can be said that the Kohala, who is known to have been a contemporary of Bharata and who lived somewhere between 2nd century B.C.E. and 2nd century C.E. is not the author of either Kohalamatam or Kohalarahasyam. However, it is possible that this work was written by another person who had the name / title-Kohala. Further the concepts being dealt with are medieval ones.