The problem is choice; choice implies an either/or, a duality one must by choosing restore unity. So one chooses either one or the other. But either/or is a complementary duality, or a two that is one. So choice is an instrument that cut the whole into two, and either reject the unchosen or makes it a product of the chosen. Choice and unity are incompatible. As J. Krishnamurti said: Truth is choiceness or pathless.
As a photographer I learned to have two lens: narrow focus and wide angle. Both are needed for the whole picture. However, it is the wide angel that is primary. First see the background as it is, then focus on an object. If we reverse this, and focus first, without seeing the context, we then supply our own green screen background for that upon which we focus. Out applied story gives meaning to the object of our focus instead of the real background from which it is abstracted.
What do I choose? There is a fact, an event, something happens, but what do I choose. I don’t choose the fact for it is given; I choose the background story that gives meaning to the fact and call that the truth. Getting back to your original idea of signs. If I see the fact as sign or metaphor (which I prefer), the facts point to the background that is transcendent of the facts, real by not perceived by the narrow focus lens. The wide angel view is transcendent of the foreground. We can’t perceive the background of Being because it is a field and not an object for a subject.
Joseph Campbell won’t let me go. He says to make observed reality transparent to the transcendent. Reality is what we experience as a chooser. Every choice divides the whole into a fragmentation. The whole remains beyond experience, which is the meaning of transcendent.
Desire for wholeness or completion is the trap. We are already whole…This Dukkha is the cause of suffering says Buddha. We desire to have meaning, and meaning comes from context or background for the foreground. We desire foreground objects in time, but their meaning is produced by our story background, so no object complete our desire for meaning since it is reference to our story of meaning which is conditioned and personal.
Therefore, desired objects are disconnected from Being or Reality and placed in front of a green screen background story that we project. Being itself is transcendent of foreground objects because our narrow lens subject/object consciousness can only see objects. Our minds can’t perceive the totality, only that which is selected from the totality.
Realization or wholeness or meaning rises when we surrender our background story of reality and allow the space of meaningless to be present. What does it Mean? I don’t Know. I’m curious though.
Out of this empty space of not-knowing the foreground becomes transparent to background, and real meaning rises. Every foreground object of perception is the whole background. The Logic is metaphorical. The many is the one, the one is the many. Being or the Whole is transcendent of experience, yet they are One. We are trapped in a fragmented reality because we chase experience to attain the whole of the lost unity of the background of which we are already always a part. The whole is contained in the part.
Therefore, when we see metaphors (signs) instead of concrete stand alone facts that have meaning from our story of reality, our paradigm of reality, the real becomes unreal and transparent to the real…the real and the unreal are One. Or as in Zen. Nirvana and Samsara are one.