H-Buddhism serves as a medium for the exchange of information regarding academic resources, new research projects, scholarly publications, university job listings, and so forth, for specialists in Buddhist Studies who are currently affiliated with academic institutions.
I am so, so sorry to hear this....my deepest sympathies. I wonder if future historians will write of "the period of degradation of the humanities" the way we write of things like "the Northern Wei persecution of Buddhism"? Perhaps it is time for burial of a secret cache of Tibetan texts for future Danish scholars to discover....
In addition to Charles DiSimone's reply to Dhivan Thomas Jones' query about the publication in Japan of the Sanskrit edition of the Vimalakirtīnirdeśa discovered in the Potala, let me add the following.
First, anyone who has seen any of the unpublished manuscripts of the full translation of the Vimalakirtīnirdeśa from Kumārajīva's Chinese by Richard Robinson will notice that Thurman's later translation borrowed heavily from Robinson.
Prior to the discovery of the Sanskrit edition, all translations were based on either the Chinese or Tibetan, or, in Lamotte's case, both.
today, on Tibetan Losar, I have been called in by the leadership of our institute. I was told that I was fired with 6 months notice. Tibetology in Copenhagen will not be continued.
Dhivan Thomas Jones wrote: "I have been reading the Sanskrit edition, however, and have already seen ways in which it does not seem to be exactly the same text as the Sanskrit text which Thurman's translation was based on."
The explanation for such discrepancies is that Thurman's translation is not from Sanskrit but from Tibetan (which itself was almost surely translated into Tibetan from a/some different Sanskrit manuscript/s as that found in Potala). To quote Jan Nattier: