It’s a lesson or a blessing 💚

There is another important distinction here.
The impersonal conception of the Absolute becomes dominant when all aspects of Truth are ultimately reduced to one undivided Brahman. In schools such as Advaita Vedānta, Ātman and Brahman are understood as fundamentally one and the same non-dual reality. From this perspective, the individual soul is ultimately the Supreme, and the experience of separation is attributed to avidyā, or spiritual ignorance.
This conception is fundamentally different from the personal understanding of the Supreme found in the descriptions of Kṛṣṇa-līlā and Vṛndāvana-līlā.
 If everything ultimately becomes one undivided Brahman, then there can be no eternal diversity of persons, relationships, activities, or pastimes. 
Kṛṣṇa-līlā, however, is full of diversity. It is described throughout the Bhagavad-Gītā, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, and the Upaniṣads. The concept of an indivisible, impersonal Absolute and the concept of eternal spiritual diversity may appear contradictory. Yet, in relation to the Absolute Truth, they need not be.
The Absolute Truth is understood to possess diverse energies and potencies. Through these energies, eternal Kṛṣṇa-līlā manifests within the eternal dhāma (sacred place) of Vṛndāvana.
This is where the concept of acintya-śakti, the inconceivable potency of the Supreme, becomes important. Through this potency, two principles that appear contradictory to the material mind can both be true: we are one with the Supreme and different from the Supreme at the same time. This is the principle of acintya-bhedābheda—simultaneous oneness and difference.
 Our ordinary reasoning tends to demand that something must be either one thing or another. But spiritual reality is not necessarily limited by that kind of material logic. By the mercy of the Absolute Truth, we can understand how these apparently opposite principles are reconciled.
 So perhaps the more important question is not whether we can find some extraordinary external symptom in a spiritual person.