в продолжение упаданы

телефон

То, что телефон обладает деталями, что детали принадлежат телефону, что телефон обретает детали - это, действительно, расхожие выражения, мирская признаваемость. Так же, как и в отношении индивида и скандх. Эти выражения следуют "за" или "из" мировоззрением, миропониманием тех мирских людей.
И это воззрение не нужно выводить, т.к. оно уже есть. А выводить нужно абсурдность этого воззрения, которая вскрывается, если эти признаваемые миром вещи существуют истинно. И тогда, при выведении, действительно, нет истинного телефона, нет истинного индивида.

Этот момент когда-то давно меня сильно беспокоил, нервировал. Когда я только начинал осваивать воззрение.
Еще я когда-то "испытывал" абсолютный анализ на мирских людях. В ответ они говорили то же самое - сногсшибающее: "ну и что?"

     The rendering of upadana here by 'assuming' instead of the
usually accepted 'clinging' needs perhaps justifying. A verbal
substantive from the verb upadiyati, it is made up of the prefix
upa- +adana (= 'taking', itself made up of prefix a- +√da 'to
give'). Literally upadana = 'uptake' and upadiyati = 'to take
up' (cf. Latin ad+sumere = assumere, English to assume, assuming
= 'to take upon oneself and assumptive = 'to take for
granted' COD). By first metaphor, upadana is a normal Pali word
for a fire's fuel (cf. 'consumption'). By second metaphor it is
placed in conscious-behaviour contexts, principally in the formula
of Dependent Arising, where it occupies the position intermediate
between Craving (tanha) and Being (bhava): Craving (governed by
Ignorance) conditions the Assuming ('clinging') that is necessary
in order to Be. Four kinds are distinguished, namely sensual-
desires (both objective and subjective), views, misapprehended
virtue and duty, and self-theories. Two otherwise identical Sutta
presentations of an aspect of Dependent Arising, which specially
underlines Being by attaching the word pabhava ('given being by')
to each term, appear with only one difference: the one starts with
the 4 kinds of upadana (M. i, 67) and the other with the four kinds
of ahara ('nutriment'), namely physical food, contact, choice, and
consciousness (M. i, 261). This indicates some interchangeability
of the two ideas upadana and ahara. ('Nutriment', lit. 'a bringing
towards one': English has already metaphorized the word 'food' in
one way by the expression 'food for thought,' see also note 570/1.)
It is a fundamental tenet, too, in the Buddha's teaching that 'all
creatures subsist by nutriment' (sabbe satta aharatthitika: D. iii,
211; A. v, 50-1; Khp. 2) thus the two ideas of nutriment and
existence signify, as it were, or are inseparable from, assimilation
and becoming—Assuming and Being—and are bound together
with the conditionality of sine qua non (D. ii, 57), just as both are
to the idea Craving, and so on. The word 'clinging' does not
represent this at all well and its own familiar contexts prevent its
acquiring this new sense: 'assuming', though by no means perfect,
is certainly better. But again, there is another aspect: upadana is
in Pali utraquistic, that is, it can refer both to the fire's fuel consumed
or to its act of consuming the fuel, and likewise in the mental
metaphor of 'assuming being', 'assuming to be' (as the word 'percept'
can refer either to the act of perceiving or to the thing perceived).
The English words 'fuelling', 'consumption' and 'assuming' are
utraquistic, but 'clinging' is not, being always the act of clinging,
never what is clung to. Consequently it is impossible, except by
some roundabout device, to translate with 'clinging' the Pali 'n'eva
kamupaddnam upadiyati' (M. i, 67); for one does not 'cling a
clinging', though one can quite well 'assume an assuming'. Besides,
a non-utraquistic word must have a quite differently organized set
of contexts from that of a utraquistic one, and so to render the one
by the other, unless it plainly make no odds, is clearly unsatisfactory.

так как никто и так не думает, что в телефоне есть сущность телефона.

Я не вижу особой разницы

Но упадана есть - и в отношении себя, и в отношении других ж.существ, и в отношении неживого.

Акт взятия для себя (the act of taking for one's self), присваивание себе. [принятие за себя (за "я")] )