Sāmānādhikaraṇyam

Definition of Sāmānādhikaraṇyam  (sāmānādhikaraṇa + ṣyanj)

When two or more words in a sentence, each of which has a different meaning, together denote one and the same object, they are said to be in sāmānādhikaraṇyam (in apposition).

Śaṅkara has, in his BSSB 3.3.9, explained that sāmānādhikaraṇyam is of four kinds.

These four kinds are explained below.

1. Adhyāse sāmānādhikaraṇyam - Superimposition.

Here the word adhyāsa is not used in the sense of superimposition due to delusion but in the sense of a deliberate mental act of looking upon one thing as another for the purpose of meditation. The Upaniṣadic statement, “Meditate on a name as Brahman” is an instance of such a sāmānādhikaraṇyam. Here the idea of Brahman is superimposed on a name, but the idea of name persists and is not negated by the idea of Brahman as it happens in the case of a superimposition due to delusion. Another example is a meditation on an image as Lord Viṣṇu, where the idea of Viṣṇu, is superimposed on the image.

2. Ekatve sāmānādhikaraṇyam  (aka aikya-sāmānādhikaraṇyam) e.g. rāmo dāśarathiḥ

i) rāmo dāśarathiḥ

rāmaḥ = dāśarathiḥ. There is aikyam. They are equal as well as identical. It may be noted that equal and identical are different. They do not mean the same always.

However, rāmo dāśarathiḥ is not the same as - sarvaṃ khalu idaṃ brahma (Everything is God).

Everything (sarvam) is multifarious, variegated and perishable (naśvaram). Anything dṛśyam is jaḍam

ii) Another example of ekatvam/aikyam is satyaṃ jñānam anantaṃ brahma.   Here each of the three words, satyam, jñānam and anantam have a different meaning, but together they denote Brahman. Satyam, jñānam,  anantam are identical with Brahman.

iii) Yet another example is, “The pot-space is the same as the total space”. Here both are equally real (vyāvahārika sattā) and their identity is declared.

3. viśeṣaṇa-viśeṣya-bhāva-sambandhaḥ sāmānādhikaraṇyam - nīlo ghaṭaḥ

i) e.g. nīlo ghaṭaḥ.

Here, the meaning of both the words are different, the words are also different. But they are in the same case (vibhakti), pointing to the same object - the thing that is blue is a pot. Here there is viśeṣaṇa-viśeṣya-bhāva-sambandhaḥ. This is aikya-sāmānādhikaraṇyam .

Here the relationship between the words is that of substantive and attribute. An example is, “a blue (viśeṣaṇa) lotus (viśeṣya)”. The thing that is blue is pot. Here there is viśeṣaṇa-viśeṣya-bhāva-sambandhaḥ.

4. Apavāde sāmānādhikaraṇyam  (aka bādhāyaṃ sāmānādhikaraṇyam)

e.g. śuktikā-rajatam

a) The example given by Śaṅkara for this is - the idea that the body-mind complex is the Self, which has been persisting over innumerable births, is discarded on the rise of right knowledge arising from the Upaniṣadic statement ‘That thou art”. Here what was thought to be the Self is found to be not so. Thus the wrong knowledge is replaced by right knowledge.

b) Another example is the statement, “The silver is nacre” (śuktikā-rajatam). Here the meaning is that what appeared to be silver is really nacre. The statement sarvaṃ khalu idaṃ brahma (Ch. Up, 3.14.1), which means “All this is indeed Brahman” is of this type. It means that all this that appears has no reality and that there is nothing but Brahman.

In this kind of sāmānādhikaraṇyam, the two which are in apposition are of different levels of reality. Silver is prātibhāsika, while nacre is vyāvahārika. “All this” is vyāvahārika, while Brahman is pāramārthika.

Now the question is -

Q. Is sarvaṃ khalu idaṃ brahma  (Everything is God), like nīlo ghaṭaḥ, where nīlam is an attribute to ghaṭam (viśeṣaṇa-viśeṣya-bhāva-sambandhaḥ)?

A. No.

Q. Is it like rāmo dāśarathiḥ, where there is aikya-sāmānādhikaraṇyam between rāmaḥ and dāśarathiḥ?

A. No.

Thus, in sarvaṃ khalu idaṃ brahma  there is bādhāyāṃ sāmānādhikaraṇyam

(negation of the sāmānādhikaraṇyam). Yaḥ sarpaḥ, sā rajjuḥ.

Q. Where is your rajjuḥ?

A. Your serpent is the rajjuḥ.

Q. Is there a viśeṣaṇa-viśeṣya-bhāva-sambandhaḥ in yaḥ sarpaḥ, sā rajjuḥ? Are they identical?

A. No.

So, what you thought as sarpaḥ, is not sarpaḥ.

First see the false sarpaḥ as false. Don't jump. It is rajjuḥ. Extending this, what you perceive as jagat, is not jagat. It is Brahman.

In sarvaṃ khalu idaṃ brahman, what is taken as the other/multiple...is neither multiple nor other.

***