Seems to become an argument, that rejects any concept of atheistic reality because of the Münchhausen-Trilemma while accepting a special theistic one despite the Münchhausen-Trilemma.
Reality: A thing that is.
A thing that is might in some contexts be real. But this means that it belongst to reality, not that it is
reality. I can't think right now of a good definition for reality, so I won't give you an alternative now.
This is the only mistake I can find, but I'm not sure to have understand everything. I wonder if the definitions on conditioned and unconditioned reality are based on the definition of reality I have critizised, but I think they will work with more accurate definitions too.