The experiencing self is a something in the world. It is either like the other things found in the world whose every dimension is to be found within the world, (or in the old sense, these things are appearances) or it is another kind of thing altogether. If the nature of your experience forces you to the second alternative then you must acknowledge that what you are as experiencing self is an unbounded opening onto the world which also transcends the world. This alternative however places an essential mystery at the heart of things. If you don't like this conclusion then one way around it is to assume that there is a more comprehensive theory that embraces what is behind appearances, a theory of the noumenal which includes the kind of reduction that produces both the appearing and the appearance, the experiencing and the experience. The transcendence would then be merely an artefact of this reduction. In this case there need be no transcendence within the noumenal as it contains all of the extra dimensions needed to resolve the mystery of the experiencing self and the experienced world. But isn't this exactly what is intended behind all the vague talk of mystery and transcendence?