Definitely what everyone else said. I would also say, please don't ask us the details of how it is. One who prys too much into the Holy Mysteries always gets distracted from the path of salvation and often falls into heresy.
The temptation is to compete with secular scholasticism to impress people and hopefully gain converts, but we need to know when to say, "let's not go there, brother." (I am hearing this in the voice of my Dogmatic Theology professor- it's hilarious!)
I will say, that in the West, the whole debate began with the Catholic idea of the Real Presence and how the Protestants responded to that. The whole argument became about literal ("real") vs. symbolic ("not real"). I have heard Orthodox priests saying it can be understood as symbolic, but it depends on how you define "symbol". From the Greek it is "joining together"- kind of like dia-bolic is "to separate". So we could say it is taking a spiritual reality (which this world often equates with "not real" because it can't be scientifically verified) and a physical reality (also REAL) and through that, the bread and wine become the real Body and Blood of Christ- truly. Yet, it still appears to be bread and wine to the 5 senses. We should also understand that it is the glorified Body and Blood of Christ, not the crucified.