Our local perspective of global unity (or any higher level meta-system), will be tangential, indirect, and self-contradictory.
Godel proved that any finite consistent system is incomplete, and it therefor follows that any finite complete system must be inconsistent, meaning self-contradictory.
The only thing that can be said about the unity is that nothing can be said about it, but that is saying something about it. It is a self-contradictory something, but still something.
Observations of the unity are of the parts and only indirectly reflect upon the whole. A description of the whole of anything is a description of the parts of that thing.
The simplest division for descriptive observations is a division of the whole into two parts. This could be the objective and the subjective, the left and the right brain, etc. This divided pair is linked by the relationship between them. The relationship between X and Y is itself a third division with distinct separate links to each of the other two parts. A fourth division would be the common link between itself and the first three parts, etc. Unity has no links.
Great philosophers have long debated whether the universe is correctly described as one thing (great unity), or two things (great duality). Both answers are correct., Higher numbers of division of the whole are also applicable to the nature of things. Just because one answer is right doesn’t mean another answer is wrong, just different.