This chapter argues that the authors of the Mahādeva story self-consciously utilized a pre-existing story of an Oedipal criminal, the story we now know as the tale of Dharmaruci, in order to promote their own sectarian agendas and demonize their opponents. This story and others encountered in this study not only challenge the picture Ramanujan and Goldman have painted of an Indian Oedipus, a picture based solely on non-Buddhist sources, but they also illuminate the diversity of ancient Indian worlds of thought. This in turn raises questions with regard to some of the ways ancient Indian evidence has been used in comparativist universal and theoretical discussions of the Oedipal.
Hawaii Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.