HomeMatsya PuranaAdh. 32Shloka 33
Previous Verse
Next Verse

Shloka 33

Matsya Purana — Devayānī–Śarmiṣṭhā Dialogue: Yayāti’s Transgression

ऋतुकामां स्त्रियं यस्तु गम्यां रहसि याचितः नोपैति यो हि धर्मेण ब्रह्महेत्युच्यते बुधैः //

ṛtukāmāṃ striyaṃ yastu gamyāṃ rahasi yācitaḥ nopaiti yo hi dharmeṇa brahmahetyucyate budhaiḥ //

Jika seorang wanita yang berada dalam musim subur dan menurut dharma boleh didekati secara sah mengundang seorang lelaki secara rahsia, namun dia tidak mendatanginya menurut dharma, maka orang bijaksana menyatakan dia bersalah seperti ‘pembunuh Brahmana’ (brahma-hatyā).

ṛtukāmāmdesiring conception / being in season (fertile period)
ṛtukāmām:
striyama woman
striyam:
yaḥ tuwhoever
yaḥ tu:
gamyāmone who may be approached (lawfully permissible partner)
gamyām:
rahasiin private / secretly
rahasi:
yācitaḥhaving been requested / invited
yācitaḥ:
na upaitidoes not go to / does not approach
na upaiti:
yaḥ hifor he who
yaḥ hi:
dharmeṇaaccording to dharma / the rightful rule
dharmeṇa:
brahmahetyā (brahma-hatyā)Brahmin-slaying (the gravest sin)
brahmahetyā (brahma-hatyā):
ucyateis said / is called
ucyate:
budhaiḥby the wise / learned.
budhaiḥ:
Lord Matsya (in discourse to Vaivasvata Manu on dharma)
Lord MatsyaVaivasvata ManuDharmaBrahmahatya
DharmaGrhasthaSexual ethicsSin (Pāpa)Rajadharma

FAQs

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.