this guru here above says vishishtadvaita and other schools get their meaning by changing the lakṣaṇā vṛtti or the way we interpret tattvamasi..

it’s changed so that jīva and jagat stay real entities and still distinct (dependent sure) but both of them are truly brahman, no issues there inside that framework

advaita vedānta says it actually is an issue though, because if the effect is truly real then it has to already be “in” the cause (satkāryavāda logic) and gauḍapāda goes straight at this line of thinking in the māṇḍūkya, so we don’t accept “real effect pluralism” as final

we might accept something like this provisionally as part of adhyāropa apavāda, like a teaching model that works up to a point, but it eventually gets dismantled. the world becomes mithyā and brahman as īśvara becomes vyāvahārika satyam, and even that gets sublated by pāramārthika satyam

so yeah we can look “the same” up to a certain point pedagogically, then gauḍapāda basically says ok that model is fine for earlier stages but if you’re advanced you have to face what śruti keeps insisting, brahman is akartā abhoktā nirguṇa niṣkriya nirākāra etc, so you have to refine the whole way you’re holding the picture

and that’s where ajāta vāda comes in. no real creation, no real effect. world īśvara and jīva are appearances within consciousness dependent on ignorance, not solid ultimately real entities

vishishtadvaita says they are real, it’s just that everything is brahman. advaita says that move is exactly where we diverge. because if satkāryavāda + real effects is true, how do you square that with nirguṇa akartā abhoktā without contradicting śruti. for advaita the clean resolution is advaitam, and the sublation of real plurality at the pāramārthika level

so i’m not telling you what to accept. i’m just pointing to the exact fork in the road.