Well if the dyads you speak of are Kant’s transcendental (Being) character & empirical (immanence) character, the triadic is BOTH, and both are the triadic: substance, demonstration (action), essence.
There is no substance without essence or demonstration/action.
There is no demonstration (action) without substance or essence.
There is no essence without demonstration (action) or substance.
It would be like a lyric without singing or vocalist.
They each require the other.
So there is a transcendental Virtuoso after which all virtues/capacities are patterned—we approach but never reach—but the Virtuoso approached/reached (into time, to us) first/always (subsumes all change). We can’t reach the Virtuoso, we can only receive, and give what we receive to others who receive (and give).
It’s basically all Parodites’ fault if I got any of that wrong.
It’s not an empty/abstract absolute. It’s as full/concrete as it gets.