What I'm saying is that we can say that something like grass is the "most real" because we can interact with it and it exists on it's own. We can't say that something like the idea of luck or a higher power is the "most real" because we can never have proof. In this case the grass would be both individual and universal. Each individual blade of grass is an individual - it exists on it's own without the existence of something else - but the grass as a whole is a universal - it exists in many different forms at the same time but is technically always "grass."
Oh okay I understand! It's like how we both live in apartments but they are very different. They're both "apartments" but they exist at the same time in two different ways.
I do have to disagree with you on one thing though. There is no way to say that our senses are not deceiving us into believing that what we interact with is "real." I would say that I consider something like God or another deity to be the most "real" because they are often necessary beings to explain things in our universe.
That's the thing with ontology - it's highly subjective. What I believe to be the most really and what you believe to be the most really may be completely different, and it can say a lot about who we are as people. And that's what makes it great!