ऋतुकामां स्त्रियं यस्तु गम्यां रहसि याचितः नोपैति यो हि धर्मेण ब्रह्महेत्युच्यते बुधैः //
ṛtukāmāṃ striyaṃ yastu gamyāṃ rahasi yācitaḥ nopaiti yo hi dharmeṇa brahmahetyucyate budhaiḥ //
Si una mujer en su estación fértil, lícitamente accesible según el dharma, invita en secreto a un hombre y éste no acude a ella conforme al dharma, los sabios declaran que incurre en culpa como la de un “matador de un brahmán” (brahma-hatyā).
This verse does not discuss pralaya; it focuses on dharma in household life, classifying refusal of a lawful conjugal request during the fertile period as a grave moral fault.
It is primarily a gṛhastha (householder) rule: a husband (or lawful partner) is expected to respond righteously to a permissible private invitation during ṛtu-kāla, treating procreation and marital duty as part of dharma; for a king, it reinforces governance rooted in strict ethical discipline and control of personal conduct.
No vastu/temple-architecture rule is stated here; the only ritual-ethical implication is the emphasis on ṛtu-kāla (fertile season) as a dharmic framework for household life and progeny.