Can the length of the life line predict 'longevity'?

RishiRahul wrote:'The Complete Book of the Hand' (page 120) - author: Lori Reid (UK, 1991):

"The life line represents the quality of life. The length of it does not, contrary to some popular opnion, reflect longevity or duration of life."


'The Benham Book of Palmistry' (page 469) - author: William G. Benham (US, 1900):

"In 176 the inside line is the Life Iine, though the second or Saturn line takes up a part of the Life line's function from the time the life line leaves off."


Sharing my view: both the above thoughts seem to fit in 'together' as true, when seen collectively.

RishiRahul

Martijn (admin) wrote:

RishiRahul wrote:'The Complete Book of the Hand' (page 120) - author: Lori Reid (UK, 1991):

"The life line represents the quality of life. The length of it does not, contrary to some popular opnion, reflect longevity or duration of life."


'The Benham Book of Palmistry' (page 469) - author: William G. Benham (US, 1900):

"In 176 the inside line is the Life Iine, though the second or Saturn line takes up a part of the Life line's function from the time the life line leaves off."


Sharing my view: both the above thoughts seem to fit in 'together' as true, when seen collectively.

RishiRahul

Rishi, what are you suggesting here? Can you please describe more explicit your thoughts reagrding the quote from Lori Reid and William G. Benham?

(I am not sure what you are trying to say)

RishiRahul wrote:
Martjin,

I am not suggesting something.

Out of the mentioned ones by you in the above quoted not included here; I mean your post, I found the above 2 fitting in perfectly as maestros plays music (duets).

Sorry for my poetic language.

Let me explain in my way:=
The first quote says that it represents the quality of life.

Benham in the second quote mentions that the line of saturn takes over.
In this case line of responsibility (saturn) should be found standing by it like the line of mars does.

So when the line of life ends, but the line of saturn takes over, the person sort of sacrifices his life to a higher/ moral cause:= he/she doesnt live solely for him/her self, but more so for the purpose.

Its the best I can try to explain.
I am quite inferior/not confident at explanations. So sorry.

RishiRahul

+

I think that is an excellent explanation!


PS. I think your interpretation could easily fit with the 'modern' approach towards the length of the life line (which proposes that the life line can be associated with 'vitality'... but it's length should not be associated with longevity).

However... for me it's still hard to tell how to decide whether your words implicate support for the 'modern' approach towards the life line??? ( You can read this as an invitation to take a position regarding the modern approach)

Martijn (admin) wrote:

RishiRahul wrote:
Martjin,

I am not suggesting something.

Out of the mentioned ones by you in the above quoted not included here; I mean your post, I found the above 2 fitting in perfectly as maestros plays music (duets).

Sorry for my poetic language.

Let me explain in my way:=
The first quote says that it represents the quality of life.

Benham in the second quote mentions that the line of saturn takes over.
In this case line of responsibility (saturn) should be found standing by it like the line of mars does.

So when the line of life ends, but the line of saturn takes over, the person sort of sacrifices his life to a higher/ moral cause:= he/she doesnt live solely for him/her self, but more so for the purpose.

Its the best I can try to explain.
I am quite inferior/not confident at explanations. So sorry.

RishiRahul

+

I think that is an excellent explanation!


PS. I think your interpretation could easily fit with the 'modern' approach towards the length of the life line (which proposes that the life line can be associated with 'vitality'... but it's length should not be associated with longevity).

However... for me it's still hard to tell how to decide whether your words implicate support for the 'modern' approach towards the life line??? ( You can read this as an invitation to take a position regarding the modern approach)

RishiRahul wrote:

Martijn (admin) wrote:

RishiRahul wrote:
Martjin,

I am not suggesting something.

Out of the mentioned ones by you in the above quoted not included here; I mean your post, I found the above 2 fitting in perfectly as maestros plays music (duets).

Sorry for my poetic language.

Let me explain in my way:=
The first quote says that it represents the quality of life.

Benham in the second quote mentions that the line of saturn takes over.
In this case line of responsibility (saturn) should be found standing by it like the line of mars does.

So when the line of life ends, but the line of saturn takes over, the person sort of sacrifices his life to a higher/ moral cause:= he/she doesnt live solely for him/her self, but more so for the purpose.

Its the best I can try to explain.
I am quite inferior/not confident at explanations. So sorry.

RishiRahul

+

I think that is an excellent explanation!


PS. I think your interpretation could easily fit with the 'modern' approach towards the length of the life line (which proposes that the life line can be associated with 'vitality'... but it's length should not be associated with longevity).

However... for me it's still hard to tell how to decide whether your words implicate support for the 'modern' approach towards the life line??? ( You can read this as an invitation to take a position regarding the modern approach)

Thank you umpteen!

Of course, the line of life is the line of vitality.
I never knew that it was a modern approach, though.

When the fate line takes over, the space between the thumb & the life line (saturn line actually) increases: so the vitality/the vital sense increases, but not in the main life line terms.
So a super conscious takes over the general materialistic usual mundane life (sort of).
Do not take the above literally please.

The older palmists/astrologers/numerologists had bad communication skills or were impatient to explain things and modern is always progressive, trying to decode things better... or else What is the use/need of Human intelligence?!

My thought process was, I guess modern always; and I would find it difficult to separate the 2 in my thinking.

Thank you again

RishiRahul

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Thanks for responding Rishi,

But I still have one element that remains unclear from your comments so far inside this topic:

Do you support the classic idea that the length of the life line can be understood as an indication for the the age of death?



PS. I hope you are aware that the modern approach does not support this classic idea - which is now usually described as a 'myth'.

RishiRahul wrote:

RishiRahul wrote:

Martijn (admin) wrote:

RishiRahul wrote:
Martjin,

I am not suggesting something.

Out of the mentioned ones by you in the above quoted not included here; I mean your post, I found the above 2 fitting in perfectly as maestros plays music (duets).

Sorry for my poetic language.

Let me explain in my way:=
The first quote says that it represents the quality of life.

Benham in the second quote mentions that the line of saturn takes over.
In this case line of responsibility (saturn) should be found standing by it like the line of mars does.

So when the line of life ends, but the line of saturn takes over, the person sort of sacrifices his life to a higher/ moral cause:= he/she doesnt live solely for him/her self, but more so for the purpose.

Its the best I can try to explain.
I am quite inferior/not confident at explanations. So sorry.

RishiRahul

+

I think that is an excellent explanation!


PS. I think your interpretation could easily fit with the 'modern' approach towards the length of the life line (which proposes that the life line can be associated with 'vitality'... but it's length should not be associated with longevity).

However... for me it's still hard to tell how to decide whether your words implicate support for the 'modern' approach towards the life line??? ( You can read this as an invitation to take a position regarding the modern approach)

Thank you umpteen!

Of course, the line of life is the line of vitality.
I never knew that it was a modern approach, though.

When the fate line takes over, the space between the thumb & the life line (saturn line actually) increases: so the vitality/the vital sense increases, but not in the main life line terms.
So a super conscious takes over the general materialistic usual mundane life (sort of).
Do not take the above literally please.

The older palmists/astrologers/numerologists had bad communication skills or were impatient to explain things and modern is always progressive, trying to decode things better... or else What is the use/need of Human intelligence?!

My thought process was, I guess modern always; and I would find it difficult to separate the 2 in my thinking.

Thank you again

RishiRahul

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Thanks for responding Rishi,

But I still have one element that remains unclear from your comments so far inside this topic:

Do you support the classic idea that the length of the life line can be understood as an indication for the the age of death?



PS. I hope you are aware that the modern approach does not support this classic idea - which is now usually described as a 'myth'.

Martjin,

The line of vitality; as you mentioned also that the life line shows vitality actually, & this supports the modern concept.

But actually is it modern?!

The line of line was called the line of vitalis in the olden days.
I forget who named this so. Desbarroles or D' Arpentigny, And or someone even earlier.

Someone old/olden used to create concepts; & the newer was always seen to work upon, developing it.
That is the way of life (thanks to human intelligence & their developing communication skills.

Actually there is no rigid difference between the old & the new. Is there.

RishiRahul


Pravin Kumar

RishiRahul wrote:
Martjin,

The line of vitality; as you mentioned also that the life line shows vitality actually, & this supports the modern concept.

But actually is it modern?!

The line of line was called the line of vitalis in the olden days.
I forget who named this so. Desbarroles or D' Arpentigny, And or someone even earlier.

Someone old/olden used to create concepts; & the newer was always seen to work upon, developing it.
That is the way of life (thanks to human intelligence & their developing communication skills.

Actually there is no rigid difference between the old & the new. Is there.

RishiRahul

pravin kumar wrote:Rishiji,

Life line ending will show reduction in vitality. The person lives on his inner strength as William Benham says. What the modern palmistry says I do not know but if the fate line takes over or the inner life line or even mars line takes over then there is no health problem but change in life style which other parts of the palm will reveal. Ending of life line will off course not mean Death.

What if the life line ends and neither the fate line nor the inner life line or mars line takes over? If will power is strong, as denoted by the strong thumb, the will power will extend the life line. I remember having seen a person who life line in both palms ended at 50. I saw this when he was only 45. Again I saw his palm at 52. Both the life line got extended.

Pravin Kumar

Pravin, your observations sort of explain why the old myth (regarding the assocations between length of the life and longevity)... has left the modern hand reading literature - see my earlier observation today regarding the current Palmistry books TOP 10.

Thank you for your attempt to explain the issue to rishi!

pravin kumar wrote:Rishiji,

Life line ending will show reduction in vitality. The person lives on his inner strength as William Benham says. What the modern palmistry says I do not know but if the fate line takes over or the inner life line or even mars line takes over then there is no health problem but change in life style which other parts of the palm will reveal. Ending of life line will off course not mean Death.
Rishi= In my 'experience' the life line ending may not show the end/reduction of physical vitality if the fate line takes over.
I have seen, of course in very few palms, this happening. The fate line took over. The native is physically okay.
The urge to perform in life increased; along with performance & energy.
A case is my sister herself.
Just like religions have progressed (ex: old to new testament), the craft of palmistry has also progressed.

What if the life line ends and neither the fate line nor the inner life line or mars line takes over? If will power is strong, as denoted by the strong thumb, the will power will extend the life line. I remember having seen a person who life line in both palms ended at 50. I saw this when he was only 45. Again I saw his palm at 52. Both the life line got extended.

Pravin Kumar

Martijn (admin) wrote:

RishiRahul wrote:
Martjin,

The line of vitality; as you mentioned also that the life line shows vitality actually, & this supports the modern concept.

But actually is it modern?!

The line of line was called the line of vitalis in the olden days.
I forget who named this so. Desbarroles or D' Arpentigny, And or someone even earlier.

Someone old/olden used to create concepts; & the newer was always seen to work upon, developing it.
That is the way of life (thanks to human intelligence & their developing communication skills.

Actually there is no rigid difference between the old & the new. Is there.

RishiRahul

Rishi, while you assume there is not much difference between the old & new view... I think it is pretty obviousy that there is actually big difference between the old view and the modern view:
Rishi= Just like religions have progressed, the craft of palmistry & even astrology too.
If the older palmistry was not available, then the new would not have emerged possibly.
During the dark ages much older literature has been lost; also much has been distorted due to whatever reasons (this is a reason why we are not able to interpret what the older literature actually said).
This has led to communication gaps.
The divide between the old & new is in our perceptions; actually.
New developments, discoveries are a part of life.....just shows the progressive attitude of human intelligence.

Because only in the old view the length of the life line is associated with the age of death... while in the new view this is recognized as a myth, because one should not confuse 'vitality' with 'longevity'!
Rishi= May be we did not understand what the old view actually meant to say.
This is to remind that the old view does mention the life line as the line of vitalis.



PS. I hope you now understand why I presented my question about your position towards the old view? (I think my question is still left unanswered... but I won't bother you again with the same rather simple quesiton)
Rishi=I hope I have answered the question.
If not please rephrase the question please.

RishiRahul wrote:
Rishi=I hope I have answered the question.
If not please rephrase the question please.

Thank you Rishi,

I will reformulate my question as follows (to avoid any further misunderstanding):

The 'modern approach' towards the life line says: the length of the life line should NOT be considered as a measure for longevity (= the age of death).

My unanswered question is:

Rishi, do you support this 'modern approach'?


PS. It would be just fine if you answer my question with a 'yes' or a 'no'.

RishiRahul wrote:

Martijn (admin) wrote:

RishiRahul wrote:
Martjin,

The line of vitality; as you mentioned also that the life line shows vitality actually, & this supports the modern concept.

But actually is it modern?!

The line of line was called the line of vitalis in the olden days.
I forget who named this so. Desbarroles or D' Arpentigny, And or someone even earlier.

Someone old/olden used to create concepts; & the newer was always seen to work upon, developing it.
That is the way of life (thanks to human intelligence & their developing communication skills.

Actually there is no rigid difference between the old & the new. Is there.

RishiRahul

Rishi, while you assume there is not much difference between the old & new view... I think it is pretty obviousy that there is actually big difference between the old view and the modern view:
Rishi= Just like religions have progressed, the craft of palmistry & even astrology too.
If the older palmistry was not available, then the new would not have emerged possibly.
During the dark ages much older literature has been lost; also much has been distorted due to whatever reasons (this is a reason why we are not able to interpret what the older literature actually said).
This has led to communication gaps.
The divide between the old & new is in our perceptions; actually.
New developments, discoveries are a part of life.....just shows the progressive attitude of human intelligence.

Because only in the old view the length of the life line is associated with the age of death... while in the new view this is recognized as a myth, because one should not confuse 'vitality' with 'longevity'!
Rishi= May be we did not understand what the old view actually meant to say.
This is to remind that the old view does mention the life line as the line of vitalis.



PS. I hope you now understand why I presented my question about your position towards the old view? (I think my question is still left unanswered... but I won't bother you again with the same rather simple quesiton)
Rishi=I hope I have answered the question.
If not please rephrase the question please.

Martijn (admin) wrote:

RishiRahul wrote:
Rishi=I hope I have answered the question.
If not please rephrase the question please.

Thank you Rishi,

I will reformulate my question as follows (to avoid any further misunderstanding):

The 'modern approach' towards the life line says: the length of the life line should NOT be considered as a measure for longevity (= the age of death).

My unanswered question is:

Rishi, do you support this 'modern approach'?


PS. It would be just fine if you answer my question with a 'yes' or a 'no'.

RishiRahul wrote:

RishiRahul wrote:
Martjin,

First allow me to say that these crafts like palmistry etc do not work in 'BLACK & WHITE' terms as 'YES' or/and 'NO'.
You & others are aware that No singular principle in such crafts works perfect, for which it is not a perfect Science; and I am better contented to call it a craft.

Similarly in LOGIC things are not black & white; though Logic is similar to Maths (2+2=4).

Now if you read the above 'quotes' it would be BEST understood.

Even then allow me to respond to your present re framed query, which is:"Rishi, do you support this 'modern approach'?
PS. It would be just fine if you answer my question with a 'yes' or a 'no'.
[/color]

Rishi[u]= Answering in 'Yes' or 'No' is not enough to establish something in such crafts.
The answer is that I that support the approach which is approached as modern, but is an much older concept (ex: the line of vitalis).

RishiRahul

P.S: There are reasons I try not to take part in giving explanations while predictions at most times, as it could be held to 'black & white' scrutiny like Maths is.

RishiRahul

... Rishi, I am not sure how to understand your support. However, I will respect that you don't want to give me a simple 'yes' or 'no'.

I can only hope that you can agree with me that the old myth (which suggests that the length of the life line reflects the age of death), should better not be described as a 'modern' perception.

(Because otherwise your answer could be perceived as a rethoric attempt to turn things upside-down)

I hope this makes sense.