In the first week of August, 1965,
after finishing summer school, I set out to travel by car from
New York to
California.
I was twenty years old and in September would be entering my senior year at
Brooklyn
College. I wanted to visit a friend who
was spending the summer in
San
Francisco and I managed to find a ride with a couple
of fellow students. We started from a luncheonette near
Brooklyn
College on a bright Monday morning,
and after a full day on the road we stopped in
Madison,
Wisconsin,
to spend the night at the home of some friends of the people with whom I was
traveling.
This was the first time I had ever
traveled west of the
Pocono Mountains and the
experience promised to be an exciting one. After a good night’s rest, the next
morning I decided to take a walk. It was a bright, sunny day. My steps led me
through quiet streets to a large beautiful lake bordering the
University of
Wisconsin.
Turning inland, I soon found myself on the campus. As I was approaching a mall
in the middle of the campus, something astonishing happened. To the right of my
field of vision, the door of a big stone building suddenly swung open and out
stepped a middle-aged man with East Asian features wearing a yellow-orange
robe. He was immediately followed by a tall American man, who then caught up
with him, and the two walked side by side talking.
At once I realized that I was looking
at a Buddhist monk. I had never seen a Buddhist monk before, and in
America at that
time the number of real Buddhist
monks could probably be counted on one hand. I had just begun to read about
Buddhism a few months earlier, and I knew from my reading of Hermann Hesse’s Siddhartha that Buddhist monks wore
saffron robes. Thus I could identify the person I was seeing as a bhikkhu. I
was struck with wonder and amazement at the sight of this serene, self-composed
man, who radiated a lightness, inner contentment, and dignity I had never seen
before in any Westerner. The American man alongside him, presumably a
professor, seemed to show him a certain respect and deference, which suggested
to me that he was not an ordinary monk but a person of some stature. Just
watching him walk across the mall, I was filled with joy and happiness. I think
my feeling might have been similar to what a young brahmin in ancient
India might
have felt if he looked up and for the very first time saw, walking down a path
close by, a monastic disciple of the ascetic Gotama, the man that people called
“the Awakened One.”
I must have been about seventy yards
from the path along which the two men walked. I wanted to approach the monk and
ask him who he was and what he was doing, and many other questions; but I was
too shy, afraid that I would appear foolish. So I just stood there watching
him, devouring him with my eyes, observing his every movement during the four
or five minutes it took for them to walk across the mall. I was transfixed; I
felt transported to another dimension of being. Something in my heart stirred
with a deep yearning. I think that if someone had come up behind me and stuck
me with a pin I would have felt nothing, so absorbed was I in the figure of
this monk. Then he and the professor reached another building, the professor
opened the door, and the two men vanished inside. I still felt joy at this
chance encounter with a Buddhist monk, but my joy was now dimmed by a note of
sadness. For my heart sank at the thought that this adventure was over and I
had lost the opportunity to tap a living source of the wisdom of the East. Now,
I thought, that wonderful monk will go his way, and I must go my way, and our
paths will never cross again.
The workings of karma are indeed
strange and unfathomable! A little more than a year later, in September 1966, I
entered Claremont Graduate School in California (twenty-five miles east of Los
Angeles) to begin a doctoral program in philosophy. In the spring semester a
Buddhist monk from
Vietnam
came to study in the same university and moved in just below me in the graduate
residence hall. He was not “serene and self-composed” like the monk in
Wisconsin but a “happy-go-lucky” type who played the banjo, sang Vietnamese
folk songs, smoked French cigarettes, cooked gourmet pork and chicken dishes
(though by his Mahayana monastic vows he was supposed to be vegetarian), and
studied political science – a subject about which he could speak with a
boldness that would have drawn blushes from Henry Kissinger. For all these
reasons, despite my interest in Buddhism, I initially kept a distance from him.
Still, once I got to know him, I came to like him and eventually accepted him
as my first Buddhist teacher. By the time the summer of 1967 came, we were
sharing the same apartment in the graduate residence hall and later moved to a
small house off campus.
One day (I think it was in November
1967) he told me that a distinguished Buddhist monk from
Vietnam named Ven. Thich Minh Chau was in the
U.S. and would soon be visiting
Los Angeles. Ven. Minh Chau, he said, was the
rector of Van Hanh University and an accomplished Buddhist scholar. He had
gotten a doctorate from Nalanda Buddhist Institute in
India and had
written an important comparative study of the Pali Majjhima Nikaya and the
Chinese Madhyama Agama. My monk-friend was planning to go to
L.A. to meet Thich Minh Chau and he invited
me to accompany him.
So one bright morning in the late
autumn we arrived at the house of the Vietnamese family with whom the
distinguished monk was staying. When the Ven. Minh Chau came out from his guest
room, I saw a middle-aged man draped in a yellow-orange robe, serene and
self-composed, dignified in manner, radiating goodness and sagacity. He looked
indeed very much like the monk that I had seen two years before crossing the
campus of the
University
of
Wisconsin. Still, I
couldn’t be sure, as it was not unlikely that two middle-aged East Asian monks
could look alike. I had seen the monk at
Wisconsin
from a distance of seventy or eighty yards and thus couldn’t distinguish his
facial features very well. So I decided to inquire. I had to wait patiently
while my monk-friend, Ven. Minh Chau, and the host family spoke in Vietnamese.
When I got an opportunity I asked him, “Is this your first visit to
America, sir?”
He said, “No, I was here a few years ago.” That was what I expected. Then I
asked: “By any chance, could the Venerable have been on the campus of the
University of
Wisconsin in early August 1965?” And he
said, “In fact I was. I was visiting my friend, Professor Richard Robinson, who
started a program of Buddhist Studies there.” Then I told him about that day
when I had watched him walk across the campus. He chuckled gently and said, “So
this is not the first time we are meeting.”
Several years later, when Ven. Thich
Minh Chau next visited the
U.S.
(perhaps it was 1969), he stayed with us for a couple of days at our house in
Claremont. Still later,
when I was planning my trip to Asia to receive bhikkhu ordination and study the
Dhamma, he gave me useful advice and provided me with a beautiful open letter
of introduction to Buddhist authorities in
Asia.
I kept that letter and still have it with my belongings in
Kandy. It was he who suggested that, when I
go to
Sri Lanka,
I study with Ven. Nyanaponika Mahathera, though I could not fulfill that aim
for several years after my arrival in the island. During my first years as a
monk in
Sri Lanka
I occasionally wrote to Ven. Thich Minh Chau for advice and he always answered
me promptly and thoughtfully.
I lost contact with him after
South Vietnam
fell to the Communists in 1975, but when planning this lecture, I recalled our
earlier meetings, and these memories became so vivid that I felt I had to make
inquiries about him. Through the internet, I contacted a Vietnamese webmaster
in
Australia and found out
he is still alive in
Ho Chi Minh City,
though weak and ill with Parkinson’s disease. He must be close to 90 years of
age. I have written a letter to him and sent it by e-mail to the Australian
Vietnamese webmaster, who has forwarded it to a friend of his, a monk in
Vietnam who is
a former student of Ven. Minh Chau.
Over the past few decades, before his
illness incapacitated him, Ven. Thich Minh Chau translated into Vietnamese the
four Nikayas of the Pali Canon. This fact I learned only very recently. Now
here is the remarkable and uncanny thing that raises some interesting
questions. On that day in early August 1965, a twenty year old American college
student, who would one day be the co-translator of the Majjhima Nikaya,
translator of the Samyutta Nikaya, and (let us hope) some day the translator of
the Anguttara Nikaya, encountered by sheer chance a Vietnamese monk, almost
thirty years older than himself, who would translate the four Nikayas into
Vietnamese. The American student at that time was not at all involved in Buddhist
studies and had just started to read about Buddhism. He had no intention of
meeting the monk, and in fact they did not meet face to face. Looked at from
the standpoint of objective causality, the encounter was sheer coincidence. The
American merely made a chance turn while taking a walk in a town he had arrived
at by chance, saw the monk from the distance, and then went away without even
knowing who he was. The monk didn’t see the American at all.
But what made me decide to take a walk
that morning, and to turn off the lakeside road on to the campus at just that
point and at just that moment? Was it really entirely a matter of chance, a
mere series of random decisions? And if we can raise these questions, then
let’s ask: What broader loop of conditionality might have connected my trip to
California with the monk’s trip to
Wisconsin at just that time? If I remember
correctly, we were due to leave
Brooklyn two
days earlier, but a last-minute hitch forced us to postpone our departure until
that Monday morning. If we had left as originally planned, my meeting with the
monk would probably not have taken place.
When I left the campus, convinced we
would never meet again, I did nothing to consciously facilitate another meeting
with him. Yet I made a whole series of decisions, without any conscious design,
that brought us into contact once again, and this time in a situation where we
would be facing each other as fellow Dhamma-farers. I selected a graduate
school that eventually brought me into contact with another Vietnamese monk
with whom I became friends – yet I selected it without even knowing that this
monk would attend that school (in fact, without even knowing anything about
Vietnamese Buddhist monks); and through my friendship with him, I came to meet the
monk whom I had seen two years earlier, whose deportment had so impressed me –
yet without knowing that these two monks were acquainted. Though I knew that
Thich Minh Chau had written a scholarly comparison of Pali and Chinese texts,
years later, when I took up the work of translating Pali texts, I didn’t know
that he was engaged in translating Pali Nikayas into Vietnamese. Yet our
projects, in our respective mother languages, are almost identical. Was this
also in some way foreshadowed in that chance encounter at the
University of
Wisconsin,
a place to which I have never returned since that meeting and to which I shall
probably never return in the course of this life?