Part 3.2 - Author of Tālalakṣaṇam

The author of this work, Tālalakṣaṇam, as mentioned in the available manuscript catalogues and the manuscripts themselves, is Kohala. D12992 mentions the title as “tālalakṣaṇam āndhraṭīkāsahitam” and the author as Kohala. R452 says “tālalakṣaṇam kohalīyaṭīkā”, but the manuscript catalogue appears to be clear that the author of this work is Kohala. In addition to this, the introductory portion itself mentions Kohala as the author of this work. 

The introduction in R7979 is as follows.

कल्याणगुणसम्पन्नं कर्णान्तायतलोचनम् ।
कौसल्यातनयं रामं कलये कमलापतिम् ॥

kalyāṇaguṇasampannaṃ karṇāntāyatalocanam |
kausalyātanayaṃ rāmaṃ kalaye kamalāpatim ||

इह खलु सकलभरतपण्डितमण्डलाखण्डलसकलभरतप्रवर्तकशिखामणिः कोहलाचार्यनामकः परमः कारुणिकः कश्चित्विपश्चित् सकललोकोपकाराय तौर्यत्रिकोपकाराय तौरञ्जकं तदाश्रयत्वेन दशप्राणसमेतं तालस्वरूपं सप्रपञ्चं प्रतिपादयितुकामश्चिकीर्षितस्य निर्विघ्नपरिसमाप्तये सर्वेश्वरनमस्कारात्मकमङ्गलाचरणपूर्वकं चिकीर्षितं प्रतिजानीते—विष्णुमिति ॥

iha khalu sakalabharatapaṇḍitamaṇḍalākhaṇḍalasakalabharatapravartakaśikhāmaṇiḥ kohalācāryanāmakaḥ paramaḥ kāruṇikaḥ kaścitvipaścit sakalalokopakārāya tauryatrikopakārāya taurañjakaṃ tadāśrayatvena daśaprāṇasametaṃ tālasvarūpaṃ saprapañcaṃ pratipādayitukāmaścikīrṣitasya nirvighnaparisamāptaye sarveśvaranamaskārātmakamaṅgalācaraṇapūrvakaṃ cikīrṣitaṃ pratijānīte—viṣṇumiti || 

Here it is made very clear that the author of the work is Kohalācārya. Moreover, this reading is found in all the available manuscripts (D12992, R452, and SR 8893).

It is interesting to note that this introductory paragraph is followed by a nāndī śloka (Viṣṇuṃ lokaguruṃ........). This is the first śloka of this work as it also mentions the subject matter viz. tāladaśaprāṇas along with the benedictions. If this verse is the actual nāndī śloka, then why use another (viz. Kalyāṇaguṇasaṃpannaṃ ….)? 

Moreover, the name Kohala appears only in this one instance in the introductory passage and nowhere else in the entire work. It is possible that the name of Kohala was linked to this work, with the intention of enhancing the status of this work, considering that Kohala was such an important figure in the field of nāṭya. Also, it is probable that the maṅgalācaraṇa śloka, along with the introductory paragraph was a later addition to the work to accomplish this end. 

Furthermore, the subject matter being dealt with in Tālalakṣaṇam is that of the Tāladaśaprāṇas. This concept according to N. Ramanathan^[1] is one that came into existence and vogue only in the 16th Century C.E. Kohala is believed to have been a contemporary of Bharata who lived around between 2nd century B.C.E. and 2nd century C.E. This being the case, how could he have written a work explaining a concept that came into existence more than a millennium after his existence? Therefore it can be inferred that Kohala was not the author of this work. 

In that case, who is the author?

In the course of the work, we find recurring references to the name Acyuta / Acyutarāya. In R7979, we find the following entries in the mūla text. 

i. prakalpācyutarāyo'sau vakti lakṣyavicakṣaṇaḥ Fol. No. 110
ii. a(ta)nnaṣṭamuttaraṃ tasya proktaṃ acyutabhūbhujā Fol. No. 116-117
iii. tālandarśayituṃ meruḥ procyate acyutabhūbhujā Fol. No. 131-132
iv. nirūpyate virāmasyoddiṣṭaṃ acyutabhūbhujā Fol. No. 159
v. tālānvivicya kathayedityaha nṛpavallabhaḥ Fol. No. 173
vi. atha mātrāmerurayaṃ kathyate acyutabhūbhujā Fol. No. 174 

This clearly indicates that the work has been written by Acyuta Bhūbhujā, which is further clarified in the telugu commentary as being Acyutarāya (Acyutabhūbhujā—Acyutarāyalacātanu).

Ramakrishna Kavi mentions a work called Tālakalsabdhi / Tālakalāvārdhi of Acyutarāya in the introduction of his book Bharatakośa. 

He also presents several readings from this work in the book under the name “Acyuta” or “Acyutarāya”.

“Acyutarāya, the brother of Kṛṣṇadevarāya, was a king of Vijayanagar. After the death of the latter in 1530, Acyuta wrote Tālakalāvārdhi, a very good critical work on Tāla-s. He discusses every theory till then current quoting Saṅgītacandrodaya, Maṇidarpaṇa, Vidyāvinoda, Caturasabhāvilāsa, Tālakalāvilāsa, Nrttacūḍāmaṇi, Kātyāyana, Saṅgītārṇava, Raṅgarāja’s Bharatabhāṣya. All these works are now extinct. While others mention these works, Acyuta actually quotes from these books; their existence therefore can be vouchsafed. In the middle of the work, it said that one Somābhaṭṭa wrote this work. The work is accompanied by a Telugu Commentary. Whether Somābhaṭṭa wrote the original work in Acyuta’s name or only its Telugu commentary cannot be determined. Acyuta lived till 1543 C.E. It is a small work of great interest to scholars of research.”³³⁰

On a comparison of the contents of the manuscripts of Tālalakṣaṇam and the entries found in Bharatakośa, V. Premalatha has come to the conclusion that the work Tālalakṣaṇam, is nothing but Tālakalābdhi of Acyutarāya, mentioned by M. R. Kavi. 

One interesting aspect is that the name Acyuta is found only in the section dealing with prastāra, and nowhere else in the rest of the work. It is curious as to the reason for such a localized inclusion of the author’s signature. Why would there not be even a single mention of his name anywhere else in the work? Could it be that Acyuta was the author of only the prastāra segment, which was added to the text of Tālalakṣaṇam? If so, who is the author of the remaining text? 

Ramakrishna Kavi, while explaining the details of Tālakalābdhi, quotes the following colophon.

सीतारामगुरुं नत्वा सोमाभट्टेन तन्यते । ग्रन्थे तालकलावार्धौ

sītārāmaguruṃ natvā somābhaṭṭena tanyate | granthe tālakalāvārdhau^[2]

This colophon mentions the name of a Somābhaṭṭa as the author of Tālakalāvardhi. It is not certain whether Somābhaṭṭa composed the entire work of Tālakalābdhi/Tālakalāvārdhi under the name of King Acyutarāya, or wrote only the telugu commentary. In fact, even the above colophon is not to be found in any of the available manuscripts of Tālalakṣaṇam. It is possible the M. R. Kavi had access to some other manuscript/manuscripts of this work, from where he gets this information. But unfortunately it is not available to us today. 

Moreover, M. R. Kavi says that this colophon is found in the beginning of the Tālaprastārādhyāya. This again brings us to the point that, this is the only colophon available, even to M. R. Kavi, since he quotes no others. The place of occurrence of this colophon is also of interest. This could possibly be an indication that Somābhaṭṭa composed the prastāra chapter alone. However there is no concrete evidence in this regard. 

It is interesting to note that R452 presents the text up to the beginning portion of prastāra. Could this also be an indication that the segment on prastāra, which was composed either by Acyuta or Somābhaṭṭa was a later addition? According to V. Premalatha, the first nine prāṇas could be a collection of material from several sources where as the 10th prāṇa, namely prastāra could be Acyuta’s own composition. 

On the basis of the above information, it can be understood that there is scope for speculation regarding the authorship of Tālalakṣaṇam. There is one mention of Kohala in the beginning of the work, some others towards Acyutarāya, and a single citation from M. R. Kavi towards Somābhaṭṭa. 

When the possibility of Kohala being the author of Tālalakṣaṇam is studied, this does appear to be doubtful. This is due to the fact that Kohala’s name occurs only once in the maṅgalācaraṇam. Moreover, this work deals with the Tāladaśaprāṇas which is a concept that came into vogue in the 16th century C.E., whereas Kohala is believed to have lived around the period of 2nd century B.C.E. to 2nd century C.E. 

In the case of Somābhaṭṭa too, there seems to be some uncertainty, as the only source of information is found in M. R. Kavi’s Bharatakośa. And the manuscripts which he referred to, to obtain this information are currently unavailable to us. V. Premalatha mentions the possibility of this Somābhaṭṭa being the same as Somanārya, the author of Rāgatālacintāmaṇi and Nāṭyacūḍāmaṇi^[3].

The name Acyutarāya appears several times in the available manuscripts, both in the mūla text as well as the commentary. Further, M. R. Kavi states beyond doubt that Acyutarāya is the author of Tālakalābdhi. V. Premalatha also affirms Kavi’s views. Therefore, based on all available evidences, it seems most probable that Acyutarāya is the author this work. Therefore this work would have been composed between 1530 and 1543 C.E.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

Tāla-daśa-prāṇa and the musicological problems in present day tāla system: 2004

[2]:

Bharatakośa: 1999: p.248

[3]:

A Study of Manuscripts On Music And A Critical Edition And Translation Of The Unpublished Work Of Somanārya: 2001