27. 24 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

24 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

posed for establishing that out of three expounders, viz. Sadāsiva, Brahmā and Bharata, the views of Brahma were the most sub- stantial (पतेन सदाशिवत्रह्मभरतमतत्रयविवेचनेन ब्ह्ममतसारताप्रतिपादनाय मतत्रयी- सारासारविवंचनं तद्अन्थखएडप्रच्ेपेश विहितमिदं शास्त्रं न तु मुनिविरचितमिति यदा-

fa. T. I. p. 8).1 As stated above, the K. M. edition has at the end the words that the work is that of Nandi and Bharata and is concerned with sangita. It appears that Nandi (Nandikeśvara ?) had, according to some mss., something to do with the Nātya- sastra. Then there is Kohala whose relation with the Nātya- śastra is not quite clear. In chap. I. 26 among the hundred sons or pupils (at least 105 or 106 are actually enumerated in Ch. ed. I verses 26-39), whom Bharata is said to have instructed in Nātyaveda and its practice, 'Sāņdilya, Vātsya, Kohala and Dantila' are the first four. In the last chapter ( 36. 65 ) in a prophetic vein it is stated that Kohala will treat of all matters left out (in the Nātyasāstra) in a later (or additional) treatise and again (in 36. 71) it is said that the Nātyasastra was practised by Kohala, Vātsya, Sāņdilya and Dhūrtila. It appears that Kohala's work influenced the redactors of the Nātyasastra. Vide Mr. Kavi's Intro. pp. VI-VIII to vol. II. and Dr. De (H. S. P. vol. I. p. 25) for some works ascribed to Kohala. The A. B. very frequently mentions Kohala and in some places regards him as coeval with Bharata.2 Vide A. B. vol. I. pp. 25 ( where both Bharata and Kohala are brought together in relation to the Nāndī in Ratnāvali), 173 (where one pāda of Kohala's work appears to be quoted), 182 (two verses of Kohala quoted), 183 (one verse quoted), 266, vol. II. pp. 55, 130, 133, 142, 144, 146, 151, 155, 407, 410, 416-17, 421, 434, 452, 459. Considerations of space forbid me from going into any details about these passages. But I should like to clear up one passage of A. B. which has been misunderstood by Dr. Manomohan Ghosh I It is somewhat strange that Mr. Kavi writes (Intro. p. 6 to vol. I) : 'Abhinava ... clearly says that it represents three diffarent schools of opinion: viz. of Brahma, Sadasiva and, lastly, Bharata, i. e. the author's own views'. The above passage makes it clear that it is not Abhinava's view but of some arfeae- धुर्योपाध्यायs. 2 E.g. Vol.I. P. 48 ब्रह्मव कविः शक्र इव प्रयोजयिता भरत इव नाट्या- नामाचार्य: कोहलादय इव नटा :... I on chap. II. 1.