Gerald, nice attempt but you're getting lost in words.
There's a beautiful book, "The Sacred and the Sublime," in which British author John Blofeld, after years of writing about Buddhism, seeks out a Taoist sage to learn more about the connections between Taoism and Buddhism.
He hikes up to a remote region on a very cold, rainy day, ending up extremely irritable and frustrated. He is sitting in the small hermitage waiting for the Taoist sage to conclude his meditation, annoyed at having to wait, and then starts to notice subtle feelings of delight, soon turning to bliss.
Suddenly, the feeling stops, and he realizes that the sage has just concluded his meditation. he also realizes he was in some way participating in the state of utter bliss which the sage continued to exude even after the meditation concluded.
The sage discounted Blofield's continued emphasis on discovering "new" practices in Taoism. He goes on to say, "Taoists, like Christians, Buddhists and most religious people are willing to practice endless kinds of practices, and to do just about everything but the one thing needful: to look within. The whole secret, utterly beyond anything philosophy or theology can conceive, is right there."
At one point in their interview, Blofield quotes from a 19th century writing on Buddhism, describing Nirvana as "the dewdrop slips into the shining sea" (meaning, the finite personality is lost in the Infinite Reality)
The sage politely praises the English writer's simile for Nirvana and then, chuckling with pure enjoyment, adds:
"But this is not entirely accurate. Rather than the finite, losing individuality in the Tao or Nirvana, is destined to BECOME infinite while - though the mind and logic may become confused and try to oppose this with their limited view - MAINTAINING individuality!"
I'll just add one more comment regarding all these rather useless philosophic speculations divorced from direct experience and gnosis.
Sri Krishna Prem, a British writer who became a follower of Krishna in India in the 1920s, and ending up becoming one of the most widely revered yogis of the time, wrote an article about language and symbolism.
At one he commented on a text by theologian Rudolf Otto, who asked whether (Christian) Meister Eckhart's Godhead, the Buddhist Nirvana, and Shankara's Brahman, were the "same" or "different."
Krishna Prem wrote that there are not a half dozen Realities floating around somewhere in the universe. There' s not even one "true" one and a whole bunch of "false" ones.
Reality is One, and each spiritual tradition may speak of one or more aspects of it, but when it is realized, it is seen to be "the same" - but our minds make "sameness" into some kind of limited mental concept. It is the "same" infinite, multitudinous Reality which while being multiple is ultimately One - and if your mind is too attached to those words, I would add, BEYOND any "CONCEPT" of "one" OR "Many."
As the Taoist sage remarked, if you want to understand this, stop thinking and look within. The answer is "closer than your jugular vein" to paraphrase the Koran.