[Advaita-l] Debunking Drishti-Srishti Vada and Eka Jiva Vada - part 1

[Aditya Kumar]

" I had written earlier about this:
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2016-May/041400.html

So it depends on what one is prepared to accept for the "tat"pada - whether
"tat" represents Ishvara with all His attributes such as sarveshitva,
sarvajnatva, sarvavyapitva,sarvAntaryAmitva, sarvaniyAmakatva, etc or the
shuddhacaitanya- and what one is prepared to accept for the "tvam"pada - a
jIva with alpajnatva, etc. or the lone jIva who is responsible for all
sRShTi through dRShTi. "
Can the phrase 'Tat Tvam Asi' be interpreted based on our personal preference or should it be interpreted based on what Uddalaka said to Shvetaketu in the context of Chandogya? Can the Mahavakyas have multiple implied meanings? Aren't the two interpretations different from each other? Did Shankara interpret 'Tat Tvam Asi' in this fashion? 
Isn't it clear that Madhusudana Saraswati, in an attempt to prove DSV re-interpreted the mahavakya, thus thereby differing from Shankara?