All that is Maya is not an answer
A physicist approached a traditional teacher. The teacher told him his whole field was appearance and he should come and learn the truth. The swami calls this unhelpful.
By Sovandarapor (James) Kong · · Nondual
Chapter 09 of 18 in Ninety minutes with a swami
Swami Sarvapriyananda tells a story against his own side. A physicist went to a traditional Vedanta teacher and introduced himself as a physicist. The teacher said, oh, all that is Maya. Come to Advaita and I will show you the way to the truth. The physicist was, reasonably, shocked. The swami's verdict is blunt. That is not helpful.
His concern is a specific trap. Non-duality can be made compatible with everything, because it calls everything appearance. It is compatible with ancient cosmology and modern cosmology, with quantum theory and with the stories of a tribe that has never heard of an atom, because the reality is Brahman and the rest is Maya, so plug in whatever you like. A position that fits every fact explains none of them, and a teacher who uses it to wave away a working scientist is not defending the tradition, he is hiding behind it.
He contrasts this with the other failure, which belongs to dualist religions. Those make claims about the world from old texts, the claims collide with what science has since found, and the believer has to choose between updating and rejecting science. Many reject it, he says, not because they are stupid but because their beliefs are a connected set. Let go of one and the fear is that God and heaven go with it. So people end up defending things that are plainly false in order to protect things they cannot bear to lose.
The way out, as he sees it, is the thing he admires in Bernardo Kastrup's analytic idealism. Follow experience and reason as far as they go, and do not contradict established science on the way. Science is preserved, the field stays open, and the metaphysics does its work underneath it rather than instead of it. He says he now borrows Kastrup's arguments in his own teaching, with credit, because they do a job the old examples no longer do for a modern listener.
What I took from it is the honesty of the self criticism. The tradition he represents has a lazy mode, and he names it in public, to people who would rather hear the opposite. We are children of this age, he says. We live in the world of science and we have to work with it.
I would add, against myself, that I am perfectly capable of the same move in my own businesses. When a number I do not like comes in, there is always a frame in which it does not matter. Usually it matters.