i feel it is a question of relative and absolute truth. in absolute we are indeed always THAT, but as long as we identify with body and mind, we are NOT THAT, even though we are it always… Logic doesn’t go there…

The truth of Absolute Brahman (Nirguna Brahman) is not denied. You should not consider yourself the Absolute Brahman without undergoing evolution through certain spiritual stages. To say ‘Aham Brahmasmi’ (I am God) without such evolution and realization is wrong. The concept of Advaita Vedanta develops an unhealthy ego among people. We are not Brahman, we are only a part of it. That should be the humility of man. The need of the hour is to develop a monotheistic culture among Hindus, otherwise, they will get disintegrated further as it happened during the last 5000 years. The call was given first by Sri Krishna, then by Buddha and Mahavira, and then by the Sikh Gurus. They all called for a reform in Hinduism. It did not work. Then came Islam and Christianity. It brought about the ruin of Hindus further. I think it is high time Hindus think and discuss what is the true basis of Hinduism. Is it the Trimurti system worn out by time or Manu Dharma, which is ever progressive? If it is the Trimurti system, then you can continue to remain divided by a thousand sects and castes. It is just suicidal and degenerative. Only Manu Dharma promises a future for Hindus as it promotes a monotheistic view of God under the umbrella of a Kalanthara Guru. That is the true basis of Sanatana Dharma, which the Abrahamic religions copied successfully. The Trimurti system worked well in Dwapara and Treta Yuga. Kali Yuga is Jnana oriented, so one has to approach a Guru for Jnana. Sanatana Dharma is the vision and spiritual culture of such Kalanthara Gurus who appear from time to time in the Yuga intervals. I wish everyone like you who works tirelessly for the Hindu cause earnestly understand this perspective in a positive way. What I am trying to convey is not my personal view. It is based on the revelations from the Radiance of Brahman, received by a great sage in Kerala in the 70s. That’s all to add.

Yes, Ayaktha is the infinite indefinable basis of everything. One who meditate on the Avyakta, attains the status of Avyakta. It is a state similar to Zero. Even God did not want to remain in this state, so says the Vedas and Upanishads. so he began the process of creation, as he felt lonely, there was none to speak to, or none to understand him. Even Sri Krishna did not advise Avyakta. He said it is difficult to achieve. One should realise the Avyakta through the Vyakta, you can seek Advaita, the nondual truth only through Dvaita, the dual aspect. Purusha is the manifest form of the unmanifest. He is God in creation mode. There cannot be creation in the unmanifest, in nonduality. Only when the nondual truth becomes kinetic through the Purusha it becomes known, it becomes capable of creation. So, the claim of Islam that God has no form is false.
I have explained this situation in the post ‘The Mathematical Basis of Creation in Hinduism.’ https://mukundanpr.substack.com/p/the-mathematical-basis-of-creation?utm_source=facebook&sd=pf

Do you accept the absolute, avyakt level beyond Purusha?

“For thousands of years, we are following the tradition of Idol Worshipping to reach the Brahman. In fact, that’s the precise way of our civilization…” This is not correct. The Upanishads and Vedas exhort man to approach a realized Guru for the realization of Brahman. The Katha Upanishad mentions that ‘Taught by a teacher who knows the Self and Brahman, a man leaves vain theory behind and attains to Truth.” (K.U. 1.2.8). It further says, “Words cannot reveal him. Mind is unable to reach him. The eyes do not see him. How then can he be comprehended save when taught by those seers who indeed have known him?” (K.U.2.4.12). “Arise! Awake! Approach the feet of the Master and know ‘That’. (K.U.1.3.14) Sanatana Dharma was Ashram and Guru-centric. The Ashram was the cornerstone of Indian civilization. That degenerated into the worship of deities through tantric rituals. Brahma Gyan was lost and in its place a culture of favor seeking and wish fulfillment took place taking Indian civilization backward in its spiritual evolution.

Categorization of gods under Trigunas is a fabrication of the authors of Puranas. How can Shaivite accept that Shiva is a Tamasic God? That is an insult to Shiva. For Shaivites, Shiva is the source of pure bliss. First of all, please do not study Hinduism through the lens of Puranas. I think you have not gone through the article seriously. You have based your understanding of Manu on the anthropological perspective. Manu is not the first man as mentioned in the Puranas. Man originated here after long ages of evolution. (Please read the Dashavatara story at the end of the article). You have based your views on Puranas. Manu is the Creator, the Cosmic Purusha himself, not an earthly being. That is why every episode of creation (Manvantara) is known after Manu, not after Brahma, or any other gods. All materials for the creation of the material universe such as space, panchendriyas, panchbhutas, etc. originated from the Purusha alias Manu. The splitting of the Cosmic person into a man and woman is also related to Manu. Manu Dharma or Manu Parampara is presided over by Kalanthara Gurus or aeonic Gurus, who appear in every yuga at appropriate intervals for the spiritual evolution of mankind. That is the structure of Sanatana Dharma. This structure was abandoned by the Vedic ritualists to promote deity worship, through the temple-centric worship system (presided over and controlled by them) through the concept of Trimurti which has no sanction in the Vedas and Upanishads. Brahman is known only through a Brahma Gyani Guru, not through the worship at temples. The Guru-centric Ashram system was abandoned and in its place the priest-centric temple system was promoted arresting the spiritual evolution as willed by Manu, the father of this solar system. This was the reason for the spiritual debacle of India and the decline of Indian civilization.

Aren’t the 3 Gods an expression of the 3 gunas, which come before Manu?