Chit

I can't see chit as an object, when said, here object, as well as subject are both chit alone.
Chit is subject and object both.

Thats because chit and sat are one and the same, chit IS sat.

Its difficult to get around to the fact, that what is sat, is the reality of both subject and object. Usually we give existence aspect only to object, and consciousness only to subject.

But here we say brahman is the reality, which is the satchit, which includes both subject and object.

So in the understanding of brahman, both subject and object are included at first, therein brahman satchit is said to be the non different cause, wherein the effect itself is the cause, non separate from the cause.

The effect , which is subject and object, are the differentiated form of the non dual cause, and undifferentiated form is avyakta brahman. Both differentiated and undifferentiated are brahman,

Now the non subject, non object brahman, that we talk about, the vivarta upAdana kArana brahman, cannot be talked about in terms of subject or object, but is certainly satchitananda jagat kAranam brahman, the self atman it is, and in itself does not have the form or name. That neti neti,, negation of mithya name and form, and the understading of brahman being cause are enough for atman to be clearly understood.