Here is the Jain understanding of these three relation-types as they are discussed in discussions around Nyaya Bhumika, in simple, Jain-anchored terms:

• Svarupa sambandha (self-linking or intrinsic relation)

- What it means: A direct, inherent relation of a thing to its own essential character or to a property that cannot be separated from it. - Jain example idea: When a quality or characteristic is tied to the thing itself in such a way that you cannot separate the quality from the thing without altering what the thing essentially is. In Jain logic, this category is used to explain how certain properties or essences belong to a substance in a way that is not just a matter of external contact or of mere possession. - Note: In Navya-Nyāya discussions this is treated as a direct, self-linked relation that helps explain how certain predicates truly inhere in their substrata.

• Tadatmya (abheda, tadatmya)

- What it means: Essential identity or non-separateness; the thing is identical with its essence, so there is no genuine separation between the entity and its core nature. - Jain implication: This speaks to a strict identity between a thing and its own essential nature (its sva). In practice, it helps explain why certain things cannot be truly distinct from what they essentially are. - Note: In Jain discussions, tadatmya/abheda is treated as a form of self-identity that resists separation, and this helps avoid mislabelling a thing as something it is not.

• Samavaya sambandha (inherent or inseparable relation between substance and its substratum/attribute)

- What it means: The relation where a substance and its attribute or parts stand in an inseparable, inherent connection. - Jain idea: This is the kind of relation in which the existence of a quality or a part is bound up with the thing itself (for example, a pot and the clay that makes it, in classical discussions). In Jain logic, samavaya helps explain how certain properties are inseparably linked to their substrate, so they cannot exist independently of it. - Practical use: It is used to reason about how things are connected in a way that respects the reality of substances and their attributes without invoking external or fabricated links.

A few pointers

• Digambar and Shvetambar traditions both accept these kinds of relational analyses, but the wording and emphasis in their canonical commentaries can differ slightly. The essential aim in both is to preserve a clean, authentic Jain view of how things are related in reality, without importing non-Jain metaphysical commitments.
• If you’d like, I can summarize how a specific Jain text or commentator treats these three kinds of relations with exact verses and phrases from Jain scriptures.

If you want to read more on related Jain logic and how these relations are discussed within Jain Nyāya tradition, I can point you to a relevant Jain Knowledge page.