Reality changes all the time. It means that we can construe models that imitate and thereby prognosticate this change, but it also means that we can’t find an explanation of what reality is. The simple reason for this shortcoming is that reality simply isn’t. If it had been, then it wouldn’t have changed all the time.
We can, of course, think that we can find an explanation of what reality is, as realists like cladists and particle physicists do, but this belief does not change the fact that we can’t. We can even, of course, claim that we have found such an explanation as long as this explanation is a religion, ie, empirically untestable, as particle physicists have done. But, every such attempt is actually counterproductive, since it actually contradicts the fact that reality changes all the time (ie, that time is relative to speed in space) and thereby turns science into one of the religions it, itself, counteracts (ie, makes science contradictory).
No, the truth is that we can only construe models that imitate and thereby prognosticate change, not find an explanation of what reality is. This question instead has to be left hanging between all religions.