Short answer: you can study or appreciate aspects of Advaita Vedanta, but you cannot wholly subscribe to both as final, exclusive doctrines.

Key Jain perspective:

• Core difference: Advaita is a non-dual metaphysical system that identifies the true self (atman) with Brahman (absolute reality). Jainism teaches anekantavada (many-sided truth) and holds that jiva (souls) are individual, eternal beings affected by karma, not reducible to a single ultimate reality.
• God and creation: Advaita often treats Brahman as the ultimate, non-personal ground of all. Jainism does not posit a creator God who governs the cosmos; it emphasizes individual responsibility for karmic bondage and liberation.
• Path to liberation: Advaita emphasizes knowledge of non-duality to realize one with Brahman. Jainism emphasizes right belief, right knowledge, and right conduct (along with ascetic practice) to purify karma and achieve kevala-jnana (absolute knowledge).
• Anekantavada as a bridge: Jainism already offers a pluralistic, non-absolutist view. You can acknowledge multiple viewpoints without fully accepting them as ultimate truth. This can harmonize a respectful interest in Vedanta with Jain commitments, as long as you keep Jain metaphysical foundations intact.

What to watch for if you try to combine:

• Doctrinal commitments: accepting Brahman as the ultimate, and the non-dual identity of self and world, would conflict with Jain ontology and ethics.
• Practice and aim: Jain practice centers on ahimsa (non-violence), aparigraha (non-attachment), and ascetic discipline to purify karma. Advaita’s emphasis on knowledge of Brahman may sit alongside, but it isn’t a substitute for Jain sadhana.

If you’d like, I can share Jain sources that outline anekantavada and the Jain view on liberation to help you compare more precisely.