27: Definition of Sahokti Alaṃkāra

Sahokti is a sort of connected description of upameya and upamāna.

Almost all the ancient rhetoricians have admitted it. Bhāmaha defines it as—

tulyakāle kriye yatra bastudvayasamāśraye/
padenaikena kathyete sahoktiḥ sāmatāyathā//
  —Kāvyālaṃkāra (of Bhāmaha) 3.38.

—When two actions occurring at the same time but depending upon two different objects are described by one word, the figure is called sahokti.

Udbhaṭa follows the same definition with a minor change^[1] . Daṇḍin has defined sahokti as the conjunctive statement of the qualities of actions of objects—

sahoktiḥ sahabhāvena kathanaṃ guṇakarmaṇām/
  —Kāvyādarśa (of Daṇḍin) 2.351.

—The same definition with minute changes can be seen in the Agnipurāṇa^[2] and in the doctrines of Mammaṭā^[3] , Hemacandra^[4] , Vāgbhaṭa II^[5] and Keśavamiśra^[6] .

Vāmana follows the footsteps of his predecessors in the treatment of the figure sahokti. He defines the figure as—

vastudvayakriyayostulyakālayorekapadābhidhānaṃ sahoktiḥ/
  —Kāvyālaṃkārasūtravṛtti (of Vāmana) 4.3.28.

—When the two actions of two objects occurring at the same time are described by the means of a single word, the figure is called sahokti.

In the following vṛtti Vāmana adds that the simultaneity between the qualities and actions of the two objects which constitutes the base of the figure sahokti must be described by the word ‘saha’ or any other word having the sense of ‘saha’—

vastudvayasya kriyayostulyakālayor ekena padenābhidhānaṃ sahārthaśabdasāmarthyāt sahoktiḥ/
  —Kāvyālaṃkārasūtravṛtti (of Vāmana) 4.3.28. vṛtti.

Vāmana illustrates the figure sahokti as—

astaṃ bhāsvān prayātaḥ saha ripubhirayaṃ saṃhriyantāṃ balāni/
  —Kāvyālaṃkārasūtravṛtti (of Vāmana) 4.3.28. vṛtti.

—The sun has gone to set along with the enemies; so withdraw the forces.

Here the setting of the sun and the destruction of the enemies are the two actions belonging to two things. These two actions are simultaneously described through the use of the word ‘saha’.

In the figure sahokti the connection of upameya with the verb is direct and expressed while the connection of upamāna with the verb is implied through the use of the word ‘saha’. Thus the upamāna here becomes ‘apradhāna’ or secondary by the rule ‘sahayukte'pradhāne’^[7] . It is marked therefore with the third case-ending. The upameya here is ‘pradhāna’ or primary and is the nominative case. It is marked by the first case-ending. The relation between the two objects brought together in sahokti should be ‘guṇapradhānabhāva’ or ‘kriyāpradhānabhāva’ (superiority in respect of qualities or actions). Again, the two actions in sahokti must be ‘tulyakālika’ or taking place at the same time. Indurāja, in his commentary of Kāvyālaṃkārasārasaṃgraha of Udbhaṭā, points out that this ‘tulyakālatā’ is expressed in two ways. In the first kind of ‘tulyakālatā’ the actions are equally predominant and they both have their respective subjects directly connected with the verb, viz., “devadatta yajñadattena saha bhuñjāte”. In the second type of ‘tulyakālatā’ the action of one particular object is directly connected with the verb but the connection of the other object with the verb is implied through the word ‘saha’. This second type of ‘tulyakālatā’ is the essence of the figure sahokti. This type of ‘tulyakālatā’ gives rise to a certain kind of ‘vakrabhaṇiti’ or crooked speech which adds to the charm of the figure^[8] .

Vāmana has differentiated sahokti from the figure tulyayogitā. He states that in sahokti there is no intension of expressing superiority or inferiority between the two things but in tulyayogitā the similarity with a superior thing is meant to be indicated^[9] . Indurāja remarks that the figure sahokti is different from the figure dīpaka. The basic feature of sahokti is ‘tulyakālatā’ and it is absent in dīpaka. In dīpaka there is ‘paurvāparyabhāva’ or consequential order between the two actions. Again, Ruyyaka has pointed out that the difference between the figures sahokti and vyatireka. Though the sense of difference persists in both the figures, in sahokti one object is regarded as principal and the other as subordinate to it. Two objects are connected directly or indirectly by the relation of accompaniment and thus the notion of superiority or inferiority is not raised here.

Ruyyaka, therefore, defines the figure as—

upamānopameyayorekasya prādhānyanirdeśe'parasya sahārthasaṃbandhaṃ sahoktiḥ/
  —Alaṃkārasarvasva (of Ruyyaka) p-81.

—Vidyādhara^[10] and Jagannātha^[11] have followed this definition closely in their treatment of the figure.

Ruyyaka, Vidyānātha, Viśvanātha, Jagannātha etc. have mentioned that the statement of simultaneity between the qualities and actions of two objects in sahokti can never be a matter of fact description like “putreṇa saha āgataḥ pitā/”. It has to be based upon atiśayokti. Ruyyaka states that this atiśayokti can be of two types—one involving the reversal of the rule of cause and effect and the other being the total suppression of the upameya by the upamāna popularly known as ‘abhedādyavasāya’. Again, this ‘abhedādyavasāya’ can be imparted in two ways—by the use of śleṣa or paronomasia or by non-coalescence^[12] . In this context, Ruyyaka has also cited the illustration of sahokti furnished by Vāmana and explained it as based upon śleṣa^[13] .

From the doctrines of Sanskrit rhetoricians the following basic characteristics of the figure sahokti can be mentioned—

i) Sahokti is a connected description of the upameya and the upamāna.

ii) The relation of accompaniment between upameya and upamāna is revealed here by means of the word ‘saha’ or any similar word denoting ‘sahabhāva’.

iii) In sahokti, the upameya is generally deemed as principal and the upamāna as subordinate to it. But the sense of accompaniment present in the figure raises these two objects at par.

iv) Sahokti is not a matter of fact statement. It has to convey a striking charm based on crooked speech (vakrabhaṇiti) or atiśayokti.

The treatment of the figure sahokti by Vāmana clearly draws a comprehensive picture of the basic structure of the figure. While Vāmana follows his predecessors in defining the figure, his followers in Sanskrit Poetics have more or less marched on the same path in their treatment of the figure.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

tulyakāle kriye yatra bastudvayasamāśrite/
padenaikena kathyete sāsahoktirmatāsatām//
  —Kāvyālaṃkārasārasaṃgraha (of Udbhaṭā) 5.16.

[2]:

sahoktiḥ sahabhāvena kathanaṃ tulyadharmiṇām/
  —Agnipurāṇa 344.23.

[3]:

sāsahoktiḥ sahārthasya balādekaṃ dvivācakam/
  —Kāvya-prakāśa (of Mammaṭa) 10.170.

[4]:

sahārthabalāddharmasyānvayaḥ sahoktiḥ/
  —Kāvyānuśāsana (of Hemacandra) 6.13.

[5]:

sahabhāvakathanaṃ sahoktiḥ/
  —Kāvyānuśāsana (of Vāgbhaṭā II) p-38.

[6]:

samānakāloktiḥ sahoktiḥ/
  —Alaṃkāraśekhara (of Keśavamiśra) 13th marīci. p-36.

[7]:

Aṣṭādhyāyī. 2.3.19.

[8]:

tatreha dvitīyāgatirāśrīyate śabdena rūpeṇaikatra kriyāsaṃbandhasya pratītasyāparatrārthena rūpeṇonnīyamānatvena vakrabhaṇiteḥ sadbhāvāt/ evaṃvidhasya yatraiva śobhātiśayavidhāyitvaṃ tatraiva sahokteralaṃkāratā na sarvatretidraṣṭavyam/
  —Laghuvṛtti. Alaṃkārasarvasva (of Ruyyaka) p-73.

[9]:

atrārthayornyūnatvaviśiṣṭatve na sta iti neyaṃ tulyayogiteti/
  —Kāvyālaṃkārasūtravṛtti (of Vāmana) 4.3.28. vṛtti.

[10]:

prādhānyena nibaddhaṃ yadyupamānopameyayorekam/
anyat sahārthasahitaṃ bhavati sahoktistadākhyātā//
  —Ekāvalī (of Vidyādhara) 8.21.

[11]:

guṇapradhānabhāvāvacchinnasahārthasaṃbandhaḥ sahoktiḥ /
  —Rasa-gaṅgādhara (of Jagannātha) Chapter-II. p-357.

[12]:

sāca kāryakāraṇapratiniyamaviparyayarūpāabhedādyavasāyarūpāca /
abhedādhyavasāyaśca śleṣabhittiko'nyathāvā/
  —Alaṃkārasarvasva (of Ruyyaka) p-81.

[13]:

atrāstaṃ gamanaṃ śliṣṭam/
astamityasyobhayārthatvāt/
  —Alaṃkārasarvasva (of Ruyyaka) p-82.