358 THE TIBETAN BOOK OF LIVING AND DYING overall activity. So quite generally, energy enfolds matter and meaning, while matter enfolds energy and meaning... But also meaning enfolds both matter and energy... So each of these basic notions enfolds the other two. 8 Simplifying an exceptionally subtle and refined vision, you could say that for David Bohm meaning has a special and wide-ranging importance. He says: "This implies, in contrast to the usual view, that meaning is an inherent and essential part of our overall reality, and is not merely a purely abstract and ethereal quality having its existence only in the mind. Or to put it differently, in human life, quite generally, meaning is being . . ." In the very act of interpreting the universe, we are creating the universe: "In a way, we could say that we are the totality of our meanings." 9 Could it not be helpful to begin to imagine parallels between these three aspects of David Bohm's notion of the universe and the three kayas? A deeper exploration of David Bohm's ideas might perhaps show that meaning, energy, and matter stand in a similar relationship to each other as do the three kayas. Could this possibly suggest that the role of meaning, as he explains it, is somehow analogous to the Dharmakaya, that endlessly fertile, unconditioned totality from which all things rise? The work of energy, through which meaning and matter act upon one another, has a certain affinity to the Sambhogakaya, the spontaneous, constant springing forth of energy out of the ground of emptiness; and the creation of matter, in David Bohm's vision, has resemblances to the Nirmanakaya, the continuous crystallization of that energy into form and manifestation. Thinking about David Bohm and his remarkable explanation of reality, I am tempted to wonder what a great scientist who was also a really accomplished spiritual practitioner trained by a great master could discover. What would a scientist and sage, a Longchenpa and an Einstein in one, have to tell us about the nature of reality? Will one of the future flowerings of the great tree of the bardo teachings be a scientific mystical dialogue, one that we can still only barely imagine, but that we seem to be on the threshold of? And what would that mean for humanity? The deepest parallel of all between David Bohm's ideas and the bardo teachings is that they both spring from a vision of wholeness. This vision, if it was able to invigorate individuals to transform their consciousness and so influence society,
THE UNIVERSAL PROCESS 359 would restore to our world a desperately needed sense of living interconnection and meaning. What I am proposing here is that man's general way of thinking of the totality, i.e., his general world view, is crucial for overall order of the human mind itself. If he thinks of the totality as consi ted of independent fragments, then that is how his mind will tend to operate, but if he can include everything coherently and harmoniously in an overall whole that is undivided, unbroken, and without a border (for every border is a division or break), then his mind will tend to move in a similar way, and from this will flow an orderly action within the whole. 10 All the great masters would be in perfect agreement with David Bohm when he writes: A change of meaning is necessary to change this world politically, economically and socially. But that change must begin with the individual; it must change for him... If meaning is a key part of reality, then, once society, the individual and relationships are seen to mean something different a fundamental change has taken place. 11 Ultimately the vision of the bardo teachings and the deepest understanding of both art and science all converge on one fact, our responsibility to and for ourselves; and the necessity of using that responsibility in the most urgent and far-reaching way: to transform ourselves, the meaning of our lives, and so the world around us. As the Buddha said: "I have shown you the way to liberation, now you must take it for yourself."