[Buddha-l] Best translations of DIAMOND SUTRA?

[Dan Lusthaus]

I agree fully with Richard Nance that it is worthwhile comparing the 
translations of Harrison and Schopen with Conze. I recommended Conze because 
I sensed -- rightly or wrongly -- that the request was not exactly for an in 
depth scholarly treatment, but for a reliable treatment accessible to the 
non-scholar.

Richard's disdain for Conze, while understandable in a certain sense, is 
also somewhat unfair. Conze, aside from his eccentricities (and how many 
scholars of that generation were not eccentric, or Nazis, or just all out 
weird people? Not many), was a pioneer in Prajnaparamita studies, and laid a 
good groundwork for others to follow. His opinions were sometimes daft or 
ill considered, but amidst all that was some sound scholarship. A 
discriminating reader needs to cull the wheat from the chaff when reading 
his works. I have less trouble with his translations, but find his surveys 
of Buddhism inane and better avoided. His Diamond Sutra translation will not 
do you any damage... and it certainly won't answer all your questions, but 
it might shift them around.

The Harrison version is part of the publication and studies of the Buddhist 
manuscripts of the Schøyen Collection (the Schøyen collection includes 
non-Buddhist manuscripts as well, such as cuneiform texts, Babylonian, 
Sumerian, etc.). This sort of work makes scholars drool.

Dan