Criticism on Aristotle's Theory of Imitation

I don't find the definition of art as "an imitation of life" correct. Imitation necessitates that the imitator and the imitated be two mutually independent entities, or the imitation will be no more an imitation. Lets take an example. A deaf guy cannot imitate a deaf guy. When you eat, you cannot imitate eating, though you may imitate the eating manners of somebody else who is not you. This shows that imitation is of something which is not imitator..... Now, if we're alive, can we imitate life? Particular imitation of life is definitely possible and not only we see it in our daily life but art too abounds in it. But if imitation is only particular in nature, what about the universality art claims?