Essences don't enhypostasize. They are enhypostasized. Hypostases are enessenced by persons.

Miaphysitism's nothing that need divide our communion.

Is the Son's humanity a "universal" (grounded, formal & expressive)?

Or, is the Son's humanity a "particular" (& also groundless, nonformal & self-determinedly constitutive)?

What if, like the Father, Who simultaneously self-determined the divine nature as that immanent universal eternally exemplified by each divine person, so too, the Son simultaneously self-determined the human nature as that cosmotheandric macrocosm, which He eternally & multiply incarnates?

The Son's humanity could, then, be both a universal & a particular.

Essences don't enhypostasize. They are enhypostasized. Hypostases are enessenced by persons.

Freely, willing, loving powers can simultaneously self-determine the very natures from which they inseparably act & to which they’re otherwise irreducible & indifferent. (my Woodsian condensation, cf JDW)

Paterological innascibility, then, positively conceived as an emanative generation, needn’t implicate a proto-Father, Trinitologically?

Christological self-determination, then, emanatively & cosmologically, in creation as Incarnation, needn’t implicate a Logos asarkos.

If Cyril's "physis" refers to Christ aa one of the three hypostaseis  or prosopa (persons), miaphysitism's nothing that need divide our communion?