Dear @bernlern, you ask a good (and tricky) question. I see Deepak has answered but I haven’t had a chance to listen/watch it yet (and won’t be able to for a while), so I’m going to offer my take on it here. I think what leads us into this “stuckness” trap is the binary sense in which we use the terms real & unreal. I’ve learnt (from Advaita Vedanta) instead to see reality in degrees. The classical example used to illustrate this is the gold chain (or more accurately, chain made of gold). The chain looks real enough, sure, but when the goldsmith melts it down, it disappears, leaving behind only the gold. So gold is said to be more real than the chain, or have a higher degree of reality than the chain, which is merely a construct, the name we give to a particular arrangement of gold. Similarly, paper is more real than the book, wood is more real than the furniture, etc.
If we follow that reasoning further down the line, gold is just the name we give to a particular arrangement of protons, neutrons & electrons, which themselves are merely certain arrangements of quarks/mesons/bosons/whatever, which in turn are merely collapsed wave functions of quantum energy, and so on. And that’s if you think like a physicist. A biologist would go down a different path (body-tissue-cell maybe), but basically what all ‘seekers’ are looking for is the highest reality, or what is “most real”, beyond everything else. Words (like those in the YATU book) help to point the way, which I guess is the whole ‘point’!