Misidentification/estimation of an object. Confusing something with something it isn't. Literally: adhi āsaḥ, "sat upon, placed upon." Used as: placing something upon, superposition (another term for this is also adhyāropa). Adhyāropa is used more objectively. With adhyāsa, there is confusion. This with that confusing. This with that placing.

Adhyāsa, misconception about the objects I perceive is natural, because the appearances in the mind seem very real. Avidyā, ignorance of my own pure nature as full bliss is related to it. And so adhyāsa, and not the events in mind, body, and world, are responsible for individual misfortune. A misconception is knowledge-related, hence: ignorance (ajñāna or avidyā).

How do I solve ignorance, which stems from a misconception? By valuing every object for what it is. If I am convinced that there is only blissful awareness, and I accept it completely, I can appreciate my inner self and the outer life as such. Then I can love everyone as myself.

Technically, there are different types of adhyāsa. For example, nirupādhikādhyāsa, which is a fault (adhyāsa) without (nir) upādhi. This is a misconception in which the object that was misjudged disappears or changes into what it really is when the misconception is resolved. Like the misconception of a snake in a rope. When I discover that it is only a rope, the snake disappears. Or someone I judge as bad turns out to be a good person. When I discover the kindness of the person, who only has a certain kind of face on the outside, the bad person disappears in my mind. Of course, this kind of upādhi is based on subjective judgments.

Or sopādhikādhyāsa. A mistake (adhyāsa) with (sa) upādhi. A fallacy in which the object that was misjudged is still perceived by the senses, even though its truth has been cognitively recognized. Like in a mirage in the desert. Likewise with the truth with a W. If I know that the world is nothing but a material expression or appearance of consciousness, the world continues to be seen/experienced sensorially, even though I know that it is all just awareness, myself.

Because I need knowledge (jñāna) to unravel this error, sopādhikādhyāsa is also called jñāna adhyāsa.

The most famous article on adhyāsa is the introduction to the brahma sūtras of śaṅkara, called adhyāsa bhāṣya. A well-known passage from it is: smṛtirūpaḥ paratra pūrva dṛṣṭa avabhāsaḥ adhyāsaḥ. "Adhyāsa is the misrepresentation of something that has been seen or experienced before, of something else." I'm afraid of snakes. I see snakes in ropes. The main misrepresentation in self-examination is the confusion of the body and mind with the self. With all the confusion that entails. For example, the confusion of the phenomena of the mind with pure consciousness. This still happens a lot in the common consciousness sciences. Another example is that the body is mortal, but through adhyāsa we think, "I am mortal, whereas as consciousness we are immortal.

Another important statement from the article is: ātmā anātmānoḥ mithyā saṃbandhaḥ adhyāsaḥ. "The erroneous association between the self and the non-self is what is called adhyāsa." This implies that our experience of "I" as a limited individual is a result of superimposing qualities such as limitation, action, and suffering (which belong to anātmā) on the boundless and eternal self. So there is erroneous mutual association (anyonya or itaretara adhyāsa) between ātman (self) and anātmā (not self), between non-self and self: The body is limited, but we think: "I am limited." And vice versa between self and non-self: The self is consciousness, but we think that consciousness comes from the mind. That consciousness is therefore an object, and that it is something that can be objectified. Śaṅkara defines it this way: samsargō'nya anya dharmāṇām adhyāsaḥ. "The blending of each other's attributes is adhyāsa."

So there are many mistakes to be made. The general mistake that is made is that objects are projected onto consciousness, the self, and thus erroneously attribute properties to myself. The general term to express this is: artha adhyāsa object-superposition, or object-misconception. Some specific forms of this that you may encounter are:

śarīra adhyāsa: Misconception of the superimposition of the body on the self. In this form of adhyāsa, we identify with the physical body, while the body is only a temporary vehicle. Examples: The feeling of "I'm young/old" or "I'm sick/healthy." The idea that the self is born and dies along with the body.

kartṛtva adhyāsa: Misconception of the superimposition of doership on the self. Here the mind, acting and thinking, is wrongly identified with the self. The self is therefore regarded as the kartṛ or kartā (doer). Example: The idea that "I'm doing this" or "I'm responsible for this outcome." Corollary: This causes attachment to karma, because one sees oneself as the source of action and responsibility.

bhōktṛtva adhyāsa: Misconception of the superimposition of experiencer or enjoyment or the suffering entity on the self. In this case, the self is seen as the bhōktṛ or bhoktā (enjoyer, experiencer, or suffering subject), which is a false projection of the experiences of the mind and senses onto the self. Example: The feeling "I am happy/sad," while happiness and sadness are properties of the mind and not of the self." Consequence: This leads to attachment to pleasure and aversion to pain, which reinforces the cycle of desire and aversion.

Both the enjoyer and the doer are functions of ahaṅkāra (ego).

sākṣitva adhyāsa: Misconception of the superimposition of the witness in the world. In this adhyāsa, the role of the self as the pure witness (sākṣī) is misunderstood. The self, which is immobile and always conscious, is involved in the phenomena it perceives. Example: Assuming "I am an observer in action," while the true witness does not change by what he observes. Consequence: This causes the illusion that it is itself participating in the world, when in fact it is transcendent to it. I prefer to put it the other way around. I am simply (sādhāraṇa) the self, and suppose that the world, as being a dependent order, transcendent to myself.

Conclusion: We superimpose or project properties onto the pure, attribute-free being (svarūpa) of Brahman. This is what we call svarūpa adhyāsa, a misjudgment of my true nature. This is the deepest form of adhyāsa, in which qualities such as duality, motion, and change are attributed to brahman, while brahman is pure, unchanging, and without qualities (nirguṇa). Examples: The idea that brahman is active, creates, maintains, or destroys. Identifying Brahman with personal gods (īśvara) or specific forms. Corollary: This leads to conceptual limitations in understanding the non-duality of Brahman.

Well okay for the enthusiasts of this one, of course it all comes down to the same thing: pratibimba adhyāsa: Misconception of the superimposition of reflections on reality. This subtle fallacy (adhyāsa) describes how the apparent world is experienced as a reflection of brahman, while this is an apparent mental projection. What we experience, the reflections of the upādhi māyā-īśvara, is nothing but pure light, only there seem to be qualities attached to it. The reflected light is no different from the original light. Example: The perception of duality in the world as an independent reality, while it is only a reflection of the one, non-dual Brahman. Corollary: This leads to the experience of a world full of names and forms (nāma-rūpa), which are only abolished by knowledge of its non-duality.