Palm, face, eyes, moles, body marks and feet - from the Sanskrit texts at chapter and verse, kept strictly apart from the Western tradition of Cheiro and Benham. You mark what you can see; about what you have not looked at, this app says nothing.
Two tiers, never mixed
283
rules from a named Sanskrit text
277 from verse, 6 from a critical edition's diagrams or apparatus. Each states its chapter, verse and edition.
94
rules from Cheiro and Benham
Western chiromancy of about 1900. From no Sanskrit text - though this is precisely the material the market sells as Indian.
14
rules with no source located
Current practice for which no text could be found. Kept rather than dropped: a catalogue that quietly omits them looks complete when it is not.
The three tallies stand on their own scales and are not combined. There is no authenticity percentage here: adding tiers together would be an arithmetic no source performs.
Five of the nine palm lines people expect are not Vedic
Each was searched for verse by verse in Bṛhat Saṁhitā chs. 68–70, the Garuḍa Purāṇa (Dutt, LXIII–LXV), Agni Purāṇa 243, the whole Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna Pāṇilekhā, Sāmudrikatilaka 1.143 and 1.152–156, and Hastasañjīvana 3.2.80–82 and 1.3.88–91. They are not there. They are Cheiro's mensal, cerebral, marriage, Apollo and hepatica lines, and they appear on this page under his name, at his tier, with no source chip.
Heart line (hṛdaya-rekhā)Cheiro's Line of Heart, the mensal
Head line (mastiṣka-rekhā)Cheiro's Line of Head, the cerebral
Marriage line (vivāha-rekhā)Cheiro's Line of Marriage
Sun line (sūrya-rekhā)Cheiro's Line of Sun, the Apollo line
Health line (ārogya-rekhā)Cheiro's Line of Health, the hepatica
The same is true of the graha-named mounts. There is no parvata of the palm anywhere in the texts read here, and no graha is assigned to any region of the hand. The mounts are Benham's system, refined from Desbarrolles and d'Arpentigny - and both men disown the astrological reading in their own words, printed further down this page.
None of these sources licenses reading a hand from an image, and the engine takes observations rather than pictures. You look at your own hand, face or foot and give one of three answers: present, absent, or looked-at-and-could-not-tell. A rule you say nothing about stays undetermined - not absent. That distinction is what the whole corpus is built on.
And this is a catalogue you read, not a verdict you receive. Every statement below is phrased as what the chapter says, never as what will happen to you. Strī-lakṣaṇa character, chastity and widowhood phala, sex-of-child correlations and every medical outcome are recorded as covered and never transcribed - a decision, not a gap.
What you have marked
Your marks stay in this browser. Rule ids are sent to have them evaluated - no name, no birth details, no image - and the route stores nothing.
0
rules you have answered
Present, absent, or looked-at-and-could-not-tell. All three count as an answer.
391
rules undetermined, of 391
Nothing is asserted about these. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent, and that rule governs the whole corpus.
You have marked nothing yet, so every rule in the corpus stands undetermined. Answer 'What do you see?' on any rule below and it will appear here.
Hasta Sāmudrika - the classical palm
Read out of six Sanskrit texts, at chapter and verse: Bṛhat Saṁhitā chs. 68 and 70, Garuḍa Purāṇa Pūrva-khaṇḍa LXIII–LXV, the Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna's Pāṇilekhā chapter in Zysk's 2025 critical edition, Sāmudrikatilaka, Hastasañjīvana and Agni Purāṇa 243. Note what is NOT here: the corpus has no heart, head, marriage, sun or health line, and no mounts.
It does have a longevity line - the āyu-rekhā - and every early witness puts it at the TOP transverse crease, running from below the little finger toward the base of the forefinger. That is anatomically the crease Cheiro calls the heart line. The curve around the ball of the thumb that modern apps label the life line is a different crease with a different name in this corpus.
Classical tier - cited to chapter and verse65
Every rule in this block comes from a named Sanskrit text at chapter and verse, with the edition stated. Press the Source chip to see the text, the translator and what the licence permits.
Classical versecl-bs68-50a-ayu-hundred
Lines that reach the root of the forefinger. Iyer's noun is PLURAL, and so is Sastri & Bhat's, who read it as the three principal lines taken together rather than as one crease [CC-8] - so the observation is the reach of the palm's principal transverse lines, not of a single line. The verse gives the terminus only; the origin, below the little finger, comes from BS 70.13 and from the Garuḍa Purāṇa.
Bṛhat Saṁhitā 68.50 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
What the text says
A hundred years of life. A line falling short of the forefinger gives a proportionately shorter span - the verse states the scale, not a table of ages. This is longevity METHOD A; it must never be averaged with method B or C.
“Lines reaching the root of the forefinger indicate the age of the person to be 100; if the line be of shorter length, the age shall be ascertained by proportion.”
tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, 1885
Says something incompatible with 3
Both readings are shown and neither is declared correct. The texts genuinely differ, and choosing between them would be this app taking a position its sources do not.
cl-ska-5-bands-verse·Classical verse·The same top transverse line, quantised into four bands by how far it reaches. Longevity METHOD B, in the verse's own numbers.Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 5 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
cl-ska-23-finger-proportion·Classical verse·The little finger measured against the first joint of the ring finger. Longevity METHOD C, and the only one in the corpus that uses no line at all - it is encoded in the palm file because it is one of the three longevity methods, not because fingers belong here.Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 23 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
cl-gp-lxiii-eighty-years·Classical verse·A line of life extending from the little finger to the middle finger.Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXIII (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908) [CC-4]
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-bs70-13-ayu-women
On a woman's palm, a line issuing from below the little finger and reaching the place between the forefinger and the middle finger. This is the singular, unambiguous statement of the āyu-rekhā's whole topology - origin AND terminus - and its terminus is one finger further along than the men's rule at 68.50.
Bṛhat Saṁhitā 70.13 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
What the text says
Long life, shortening in proportion as the line falls short. Iyer carries NO number here. The '120 years' that circulates for this verse is a single in-copyright translator's parenthesis and is deliberately not shipped: ship the proportionality, never the figure.
“If there be found a line issuing from below the little finger and reaching a place between the forefinger and the middle finger, the woman will live long”
tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, 1885
Says something incompatible with 3
Both readings are shown and neither is declared correct. The texts genuinely differ, and choosing between them would be this app taking a position its sources do not.
cl-gp-lxiii-hundred-years·Classical verse·A line of life passing through the middle and fore-fingers, on a man's palm.Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXIII, 'the auspicious and inauspicious marks on the persons of males' (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908) - a THIRD palm passage the research never cited [CC-4]
cl-ska-5-bands-verse·Classical verse·The same top transverse line, quantised into four bands by how far it reaches. Longevity METHOD B, in the verse's own numbers.Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 5 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
cl-ska-23-finger-proportion·Classical verse·The little finger measured against the first joint of the ring finger. Longevity METHOD C, and the only one in the corpus that uses no line at all - it is encoded in the palm file because it is one of the three longevity methods, not because fingers belong here.Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 23 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-ska-3-ayu-fourfold
The topmost of the palm's transverse lines, issuing toward the forefinger. Two cautions from the apparatus [CC-5]: the word 'topmost' is Zysk's comment rather than the verse's, and the NAME āyu-rekhā at this verse is Mukhopadhyaya's 1954 editorial conjecture - see `dg-ska-3-ayu-name-conjecture`. The name is attested without conjecture at v. 6.
Its prediction is FOURFOLD - the verse says the line is read in four grades, and v. 5 supplies them. That is the classical warrant for reading this line as bands rather than as a continuous scale, and it is why methods A and B are two methods and not one.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical diagram or critical apparatusdg-ska-3-ayu-name-conjecture
The reading that names the topmost line āyu-rekhā at v. 3. It is a 1954 editor's conjecture; the manuscripts read simply 'that line' [CC-5].
Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 3 - critical APPARATUS, not the verse: Zysk 2025 prints `sā lekhā] āyurlekhā E (suggested)`, where E = Mukhopadhyaya's 1954 edition
What the text says
The NAME is nonetheless sound, because v. 6 carries āyurlekhā unconjectured. Cite v. 6 for the name and v. 3 for the fourfold rule - never v. 3 for both, which would present an editor's restoration as the text.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-ska-5-bands-verse
The same top transverse line, quantised into four bands by how far it reaches. Longevity METHOD B, in the verse's own numbers.
Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 5 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
What the text says
One third of the reach gives 30 years, half gives 50, three-fourths gives 70, and the full reach gives 100. The arithmetic is wrong on its face - 70 is not three-fourths of 100 - and Zysk says so. It is shipped as the text reads, uncorrected; the manuscript figures give a rival set of numbers and both are rendered as the disagreement they are.
Says something incompatible with 4
Both readings are shown and neither is declared correct. The texts genuinely differ, and choosing between them would be this app taking a position its sources do not.
dg-ska-5-bands-figures·Classical diagram or critical apparatus·The same four bands as they are LABELLED ON THE FIGURES rather than as the verse states them.Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna hand-diagrams reproduced at Zysk 2025 App. II - the Copenhagen MS of saṁvat 1789-90 (= 1732-33 CE) and BHU C 2563 of saṁvat 1804 (= 1747-48 CE) - against v. 5
cl-bs68-50a-ayu-hundred·Classical verse·Lines that reach the root of the forefinger. Iyer's noun is PLURAL, and so is Sastri & Bhat's, who read it as the three principal lines taken together rather than as one crease [CC-8] - so the observation is the reach of the palm's principal transverse lines, not of a single line. The verse gives the terminus only; the origin, below the little finger, comes from BS 70.13 and from the Garuḍa Purāṇa.Bṛhat Saṁhitā 68.50 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
cl-bs70-13-ayu-women·Classical verse·On a woman's palm, a line issuing from below the little finger and reaching the place between the forefinger and the middle finger. This is the singular, unambiguous statement of the āyu-rekhā's whole topology - origin AND terminus - and its terminus is one finger further along than the men's rule at 68.50.Bṛhat Saṁhitā 70.13 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
cl-ska-23-finger-proportion·Classical verse·The little finger measured against the first joint of the ring finger. Longevity METHOD C, and the only one in the corpus that uses no line at all - it is encoded in the palm file because it is one of the three longevity methods, not because fingers belong here.Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 23 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical diagram or critical apparatusdg-ska-5-bands-figures
The same four bands as they are LABELLED ON THE FIGURES rather than as the verse states them.
Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna hand-diagrams reproduced at Zysk 2025 App. II - the Copenhagen MS of saṁvat 1789-90 (= 1732-33 CE) and BHU C 2563 of saṁvat 1804 (= 1747-48 CE) - against v. 5
What the text says
The diagrams read 100 / 75 / 50 / 25 - internally consistent where the verse is not. This is an 18th-century pictorial tradition, not a variant reading of the 9th-century verse, so it does not supersede it and the verse is not silently 'corrected' to 75. Show both columns.
Says something incompatible with 1
Both readings are shown and neither is declared correct. The texts genuinely differ, and choosing between them would be this app taking a position its sources do not.
cl-ska-5-bands-verse·Classical verse·The same top transverse line, quantised into four bands by how far it reaches. Longevity METHOD B, in the verse's own numbers.Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 5 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-ska-8-length-general
The length of any line on the palm, taken by itself.
Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 8 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
What the text says
A long line gives a long life, a short line a short one. The general principle behind method A, stated without a number and without naming a line.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-ska-20-three-complete
All three of the principal lines complete on the palm.
Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 20 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
What the text says
Great fortune, great learning, and a hundred years of life.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-gp-lxv-men-hundred-years
A line extending from the tip of the thumb to that of the forefinger AND originating from the root of the little finger - the two clauses welded by an 'and'.
Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXV, men's section (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908). Dutt's ch. LXV is roughly Zysk's GP 1.65 but NOT identical to it: Dutt spreads the palm material across chs. LXIII-LXV while Zysk's 1.65 runs past v. 111 [CC-4]
What the text says
A hundred years. DISPUTED, and it carries no build on its own [CC-3]. The research treated this as the corpus's one sentence giving the āyu-rekhā's origin and terminus together; the women's section of the very same chapter keeps those two clauses APART as two rules with two different phala, so the men's 'and' is most economically read as the translator's conflation.
The topology finding survives on BS 70.13, which is unambiguous - not on this sentence.
“A line, extending from the tip of the thumb to that of the fore-finger and originating from the root of the youngest finger, makes one live for a hundred years.”
tr. Manmatha Nath Dutt, 1908
Says something incompatible with 4
Both readings are shown and neither is declared correct. The texts genuinely differ, and choosing between them would be this app taking a position its sources do not.
cl-gp-lxv-women-thumb-to-forefinger·Classical verse·A line passing from the tip of the thumb to that of the forefinger - the other half of the men's welded sentence, again stated on its own.Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXV, women's section (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908)
cl-gp-lxv-women-youngest-hundred·Classical verse·A line originating from the root of the little finger - stated on its own, with no clause about the thumb. This is the half of the men's sentence that the women's section keeps separate.Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXV, women's section (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908)
cl-gp-lxiii-hundred-years·Classical verse·A line of life passing through the middle and fore-fingers, on a man's palm.Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXIII, 'the auspicious and inauspicious marks on the persons of males' (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908) - a THIRD palm passage the research never cited [CC-4]
cl-gp-lxiii-eighty-years·Classical verse·A line of life extending from the little finger to the middle finger.Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXIII (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908) [CC-4]
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-gp-lxv-women-youngest-hundred
A line originating from the root of the little finger - stated on its own, with no clause about the thumb. This is the half of the men's sentence that the women's section keeps separate.
Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXV, women's section (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908)
What the text says
A hundred years. Read with the next rule, this pair is the internal evidence that the men's single sentence is two rules joined by a translator [CC-3].
“A line originating from the root of the youngest finger indicates life for a hundred years.”
tr. Manmatha Nath Dutt, 1908
Says something incompatible with 1
Both readings are shown and neither is declared correct. The texts genuinely differ, and choosing between them would be this app taking a position its sources do not.
cl-gp-lxv-men-hundred-years·Classical verse·A line extending from the tip of the thumb to that of the forefinger AND originating from the root of the little finger - the two clauses welded by an 'and'.Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXV, men's section (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908). Dutt's ch. LXV is roughly Zysk's GP 1.65 but NOT identical to it: Dutt spreads the palm material across chs. LXIII-LXV while Zysk's 1.65 runs past v. 111 [CC-4]
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
A line passing from the tip of the thumb to that of the forefinger - the other half of the men's welded sentence, again stated on its own.
Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXV, women's section (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908)
What the text says
Shortness of life - the OPPOSITE phala from the men's section for what reads as the same topology, six paragraphs apart, in one translator. The Sanskrit has not been consulted, so this is rendered as an unresolved contradiction inside a single edition, not adjudicated.
“If a line passes from the tip of the thumb to that of the fore-finger it indicates the shortness of life”
tr. Manmatha Nath Dutt, 1908
Says something incompatible with 1
Both readings are shown and neither is declared correct. The texts genuinely differ, and choosing between them would be this app taking a position its sources do not.
cl-gp-lxv-men-hundred-years·Classical verse·A line extending from the tip of the thumb to that of the forefinger AND originating from the root of the little finger - the two clauses welded by an 'and'.Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXV, men's section (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908). Dutt's ch. LXV is roughly Zysk's GP 1.65 but NOT identical to it: Dutt spreads the palm material across chs. LXIII-LXV while Zysk's 1.65 runs past v. 111 [CC-4]
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-gp-lxiii-hundred-years
A line of life passing through the middle and fore-fingers, on a man's palm.
Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXIII, 'the auspicious and inauspicious marks on the persons of males' (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908) - a THIRD palm passage the research never cited [CC-4]
What the text says
A hundred years. This matters beyond its own content: it gives a MEN'S terminus at the middle and fore-fingers, which contradicts the clean sex-differentiated topology (men = root of the forefinger, women = between fore- and middle finger) inside the same translation. The corpus carries three termini, not two, and does not pick one.
“The person, whose line of life passes through the middle and fore-fingers, lives for a hundred years, O Rudra.”
tr. Manmatha Nath Dutt, 1908
Says something incompatible with 3
Both readings are shown and neither is declared correct. The texts genuinely differ, and choosing between them would be this app taking a position its sources do not.
cl-bs70-13-ayu-women·Classical verse·On a woman's palm, a line issuing from below the little finger and reaching the place between the forefinger and the middle finger. This is the singular, unambiguous statement of the āyu-rekhā's whole topology - origin AND terminus - and its terminus is one finger further along than the men's rule at 68.50.Bṛhat Saṁhitā 70.13 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
cl-gp-lxv-men-hundred-years·Classical verse·A line extending from the tip of the thumb to that of the forefinger AND originating from the root of the little finger - the two clauses welded by an 'and'.Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXV, men's section (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908). Dutt's ch. LXV is roughly Zysk's GP 1.65 but NOT identical to it: Dutt spreads the palm material across chs. LXIII-LXV while Zysk's 1.65 runs past v. 111 [CC-4]
cl-gp-lxiii-eighty-years·Classical verse·A line of life extending from the little finger to the middle finger.Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXIII (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908) [CC-4]
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-gp-lxiii-eighty-years
A line of life extending from the little finger to the middle finger.
Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXIII (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908) [CC-4]
What the text says
Eighty years - a band that appears nowhere else in the corpus. It is recorded precisely because it breaks the tidy 100-year story every other witness tells, and a corpus that only kept the tidy rules would be an edited one.
“The person, on whose palm the line of life extends also from the youngest to the middle finger, lives for eighty years.”
tr. Manmatha Nath Dutt, 1908
Says something incompatible with 3
Both readings are shown and neither is declared correct. The texts genuinely differ, and choosing between them would be this app taking a position its sources do not.
cl-bs68-50a-ayu-hundred·Classical verse·Lines that reach the root of the forefinger. Iyer's noun is PLURAL, and so is Sastri & Bhat's, who read it as the three principal lines taken together rather than as one crease [CC-8] - so the observation is the reach of the palm's principal transverse lines, not of a single line. The verse gives the terminus only; the origin, below the little finger, comes from BS 70.13 and from the Garuḍa Purāṇa.Bṛhat Saṁhitā 68.50 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
cl-gp-lxiii-hundred-years·Classical verse·A line of life passing through the middle and fore-fingers, on a man's palm.Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXIII, 'the auspicious and inauspicious marks on the persons of males' (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908) - a THIRD palm passage the research never cited [CC-4]
cl-gp-lxv-men-hundred-years·Classical verse·A line extending from the tip of the thumb to that of the forefinger AND originating from the root of the little finger - the two clauses welded by an 'and'.Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXV, men's section (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908). Dutt's ch. LXV is roughly Zysk's GP 1.65 but NOT identical to it: Dutt spreads the palm material across chs. LXIII-LXV while Zysk's 1.65 runs past v. 111 [CC-4]
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-gp-lxiii-jnana-to-thumb
A line of knowledge extending up to the thumb, together with a line of life running from the little finger to the foot of the middle fingers, unbroken and undivided.
Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXIII (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908) [CC-4]
What the text says
A hundred years. Note what the verse also does: Dutt's Purāṇic English already names a 'line of knowledge' beside a 'line of life', so the claim that the Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna is the text that first gives the lines names is over-stated [CC-4].
“The person, - on whose palm the line of knowledge extends up to the thumb, and the line of life extends up to the foot of the middle fingers from the youngest in an unbroken and undivided condition, - lives for a hundred years”
tr. Manmatha Nath Dutt, 1908
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-ska-2a-urdhva-origin
The ūrdhva-rekhā - the one vertical line among the palm's transverse creases - rising at the base of the thumb and running upward toward the fingers.
Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 2 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
What the text says
The verse establishes the line and its direction; its results come from where it TERMINATES, which the two medieval texts below set out finger by finger.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-bs70-12-wrist-to-middle
On a woman's palm: a line running from the wrist and reaching the middle finger, or vertical lines in the palm.
Bṛhat Saṁhitā 70.12 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
What the text says
She becomes a queen, or her husband becomes a king. This is the ūrdhva-rekhā under a different name and five centuries earlier than the texts that name it - wrist to middle finger is exactly Sāmudrikatilaka 1.152 and Hastasañjīvana 3.2.81.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-st-1152-middle-finger
The ūrdhva-rekhā rising from the wrist and reaching the middle finger.
Sāmudrikatilaka 1.152 (Zysk 2025, App. I)
What the text says
A king, a commander of an army, or a preceptor (ācārya). The third option is the one that matters: the Hastasañjīvana gives this same rung only the army general, so the two texts differ here and the module shows both readings rather than choosing.
Says something incompatible with 1
Both readings are shown and neither is declared correct. The texts genuinely differ, and choosing between them would be this app taking a position its sources do not.
cl-hs-3281-middle-finger·Classical verse·The ūrdhva-rekhā terminating at the middle finger.Hastasañjīvana 3.2.81 (117), ūrdhvarekhāvicāra (Zysk 2025, App. I)
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-hs-3281-middle-finger
The ūrdhva-rekhā terminating at the middle finger.
A renowned army general - and nothing else. The Sāmudrikatilaka's king and ācārya are absent here. This is the one rung of four on which the two texts genuinely conflict.
Says something incompatible with 1
Both readings are shown and neither is declared correct. The texts genuinely differ, and choosing between them would be this app taking a position its sources do not.
cl-st-1152-middle-finger·Classical verse·The ūrdhva-rekhā rising from the wrist and reaching the middle finger.Sāmudrikatilaka 1.152 (Zysk 2025, App. I)
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-hs-3281-forefinger
The ūrdhva-rekhā terminating at the forefinger (tarjanī).
A king, or a king's minister. The Sāmudrikatilaka verses available do not cover this rung at all, so it is a single-witness rule and is not corroborated.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-st-1155-ring-finger
The ūrdhva-rekhā rising from the base of the hand and reaching the RING finger. Zysk's printed English reads 'forefinger'; his own printed Sanskrit reads *rekhānāmikāṅgulīm eti*, and *anāmikā* is the ring finger. The parallel at Hastasañjīvana 3.2.82 gives the ring finger this same phala. The ring finger is encoded deliberately - DO NOT 'CORRECT' IT BACK to the published English.
Sāmudrikatilaka 1.155 (Zysk 2025, App. I)
What the text says
A caravan trader (sārthavāha) honoured by the king.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-hs-3282-ring-finger
The ūrdhva-rekhā terminating at the ring finger, which the verse calls 'the refuge of Śiva'.
A rich merchant, or a military leader. Agreeing with Sāmudrikatilaka 1.155 across roughly five centuries - and that agreement is precisely what makes the 'forefinger' in the published translation detectable as a slip.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-st-1156-little-finger
The ūrdhva-rekhā rising from the palm and reaching the little finger.
Sāmudrikatilaka 1.156 (Zysk 2025, App. I)
What the text says
A śreṣṭhin - high rank, wealth and gold, and a mind set on glory.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-hs-3282-little-finger
The ūrdhva-rekhā terminating at the little finger.
Established (pratiṣṭhāvān), of great fame - the second of the two rungs on which the two texts agree.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-hs-3280-king-fivefold
The ūrdhva-rekhā as the chapter defines it: it moves from the wrist facing the thumb, and its results are FIVEFOLD - the king's case, plus one case per finger.
In a king's hand it gives auspiciousness to the kingdom. This is the frame verse: it is what makes the four finger-terminations a closed table rather than a list, and it is why a fifth termination invented for a UI would be an addition to the text.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-st-1153-unbroken-complete
The ūrdhva-rekhā unbroken, not burst open, very long, complete, and without branches.
Sāmudrikatilaka 1.153 (Zysk 2025, App. I)
What the text says
It brings prosperity to a thousand people. NOTE WHAT THE VERSE DOES NOT SAY: it states what a perfect line does and never states the converse. There is no classical rule that a broken fate line means career failure - that is Cheiro's, and it belongs in the Western file. The corpus's only explicit negatives on brokenness are ŚKA v. 19 and BS 68.50.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-st-1154-varna-graded
The ūrdhva-rekhā read against the subject's varṇa - the verse gives a different result for a brāhmaṇa, a kṣatriya, a vaiśya and a śūdra.
Sāmudrikatilaka 1.154 (Zysk 2025, App. I)
Recorded, not transcribed
The text has something to say here, and this app does not print it. That is a decision, not a gap: what is observed stays above, and what the text says follows it appears nowhere in this app.
Editor's note: The verse indexes its phala to the subject's varṇa. AstroZivi does not ask a user's caste and will not render a caste-graded prediction. The rule is recorded so the corpus is not silently edited - its condition may show, its four outcomes may not.
Classical versecl-ska-7-thumb-belly-count
The lines lying on the track of the thumb's belly - the fleshy pad at the thumb's base - counted.
Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 7 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
What the text says
As many such lines as there are, so many are the person's offspring. A pure COUNT rule with no sex clause, which is why it renders in full where the other three witnesses are partly withheld. It is also the clearest statement of the position: the thumb, not the little finger.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-bs68-49-thumb-santana
The lines below the root of the thumb, distinguished by SIZE - the verse separates big lines from small ones.
Bṛhat Saṁhitā 68.49 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
Recorded, not transcribed
The text has something to say here, and this app does not print it. That is a decision, not a gap: what is observed stays above, and what the text says follows it appears nowhere in this app.
Editor's note: Sex-of-child prediction. Permanently excluded - PCPNDT Act, and the founder's exclusion stands unchanged by the palmistry overrule. The position (root of the thumb) and the observation (line size) are recorded because they are one of the four witnesses to where the santāna lines lie; the mapping from size to sex is not.
Classical versecl-bs70-14a-thumb-santana
On a woman's palm, the same observation as 68.49 - big versus small lines below the root of the thumb. The women's chapter states it independently rather than by reference, which is what makes it a second witness to the position and not a restatement.
Bṛhat Saṁhitā 70.14 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
Recorded, not transcribed
The text has something to say here, and this app does not print it. That is a decision, not a gap: what is observed stays above, and what the text says follows it appears nowhere in this app.
Editor's note: Sex-of-child prediction - permanently excluded, as at `cl-bs68-49-thumb-santana`.
Classical versecl-bs70-14b-children-long-lived
Those same thumb-root lines perfect and uncut.
Bṛhat Saṁhitā 70.14 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
What the text says
The children will be long-lived. This is the ONLY child-longevity rule in the whole classical corpus - the santāna lines are read for the children's lifespans, not merely for their number.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-bs70-14c-children-die-early
Those same thumb-root lines broken, or short.
Bṛhat Saṁhitā 70.14 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
Recorded, not transcribed
The text has something to say here, and this app does not print it. That is a decision, not a gap: what is observed stays above, and what the text says follows it appears nowhere in this app.
Editor's note: A death claim about the reader's living children. The module already withholds the death of the reader (cl-ear-fleshless), of a parent (cl-head-flat) and of a spouse (west-marriage-curve-down) on exactly this ground; a child is the same class and this row had been shipping its phala with the ground stated but not applied. The favourable half at cl-bs70-14b still renders: 70.14's two clauses are separable observations, unlike the mole stanzas whose halves share one strī-lakṣaṇa frame.
Classical versecl-gp-lxv-thumb-root-offspring
Lines originating from the root of the thumb.
Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXV, men's section (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908)
What the text says
Offspring, and happiness. Dutt renders the Sanskrit putra as 'sons'; it is rendered here as offspring, because the verse is not contrasting one sex against the other - it is a generic progeny blessing, and the contrastive size-to-sex rules are withheld separately.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-gp-lxv-women-thumb-foot
On a woman's palm, a line from the foot of the thumb, taken as long or short - the fourth independent witness to the thumb-root position.
Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXV, women's section (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908)
Recorded, not transcribed
The text has something to say here, and this app does not print it. That is a decision, not a gap: what is observed stays above, and what the text says follows it appears nowhere in this app.
Editor's note: Sex-of-child prediction - permanently excluded. The position and the long/short observation are recorded as the fourth witness; the outcomes are not.
Classical versecl-gp-lxv-women-line-broken-often
That thumb-root line broken in many places.
Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXV, women's section (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908)
What the text says
Dutt reads only 'the shortness of life' - WHOSE life is not stated. The word 'children's' that the research attached here comes from Zysk 2016's critical text of a passage Dutt renders without it, and importing it would blend two editions the module keeps apart [CC-9].
“it indicates the shortness of life”
tr. Manmatha Nath Dutt, 1908
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-gp-lxv-women-line-broken-wide
That same line broken at a long interval, rather than in many places.
Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXV, women's section (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908)
What the text says
Longevity. The pair is worth keeping together: the corpus reads the SPACING of the breaks, not merely their presence, which is a finer distinction than the popular literature makes.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-ska-6-middle-line-wealth
The line that appears BETWEEN the topmost line and the knowledge line - the middle transverse crease. The verse says it is to be known by the name of an asterism.
Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 6 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
What the text says
It is for the sake of a man's wealth. This verse is also where āyurlekhā stands unconjectured, so it is the citation for the NAME of the longevity line even though v. 3 carries its rule.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical diagram or critical apparatusdg-dhanamatr-rekha-name
The middle transverse line, called dhanamātṛ-rekhā - 'the prosperity-mother line' - and on other figures mātā or dhanamāna-rekhā.
Zysk 2025's note to Pāṇilekhā v. 6, reporting the label ON THE DIAGRAMS (App. II: the Copenhagen MS of 1732-33 CE and BHU C 2563 of 1747-48 CE) - NOT the verse, which says only that the middle line is known by an asterism's name
What the text says
The name is real, edited and datable - and it is 18th-century pictorial evidence, not 9th-century verse [CC-5]. It is kept at the diagram tier because the module refuses the santāna position on exactly this ground, and a rule that applies only to positions it dislikes is not a rule. The WEALTH sense of the middle line does stand on the verse; only the name does not.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-ska-2b-jnana
The second line, which the verse calls more auspicious and says is for the sake of knowledge - the jñāna-rekhā.
Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 2 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
What the text says
Learning. The diagrams place this line at the LOWER transverse crease - where Western palmistry draws the life line. It is not a head line and it is not a life line: renaming it either way to fill a UI slot is the single move this module exists to prevent.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical diagram or critical apparatusdg-jnana-alternate-names
The same lower transverse line labelled pitṛ-rekhā ('the father's line') or sarasvatī-rekhā on the figures.
The manuscript hand-diagrams reproduced at Zysk 2025 App. II - not any verse of the Pāṇilekhā
What the text says
Lineage, or learning under Sarasvatī's name. Diagram-tier for the same reason as the dhanamātṛ-rekhā: the labels are on the figures, and the verses call this line only the second line, for the sake of knowledge.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical diagram or critical apparatusdg-yatra-rekha
A rare fifth line, nearest the thumb, named yātrā-lekhā - 'the line of military expeditions'.
Zysk 2025's synoptic account of the Pāṇilekhā line-names read against the diagrams at App. II - no verse number for this name was located
What the text says
Expeditions and campaigns. It is listed here so the corpus's line inventory is complete and so nobody promotes it later by mistake; there is no verse behind the name, and it may not carry a verse-tier citation.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-st-1143-triad
The first three lines, having emerged from the base of the hand and reaching between the thumb and the forefinger. TWO readings of the origin ship: Zysk's published English reads 'the base of the thumb', while the Sanskrit he prints, *āpāṇimūlabhāgān*, reads more naturally as the base of the HAND [CC-11a]. Neither is silently preferred.
Sāmudrikatilaka 1.143 (Zysk 2025, App. I)
What the text says
They pertain to the family (gotra), to material wealth (dravya) and to longevity (āyus). That is the Indian triad stated AS a triad, in a named text, in the twelfth century - gotra-rekhā, dravya-rekhā, āyu-rekhā, and not life/head/heart.
The correspondence with the Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna's three is real at the level of NAMES only: this verse gives all three lines one origin and one terminus, whereas the ŚKA three are parallel creases at different heights with different origins, and jñāna ('knowledge') is not gotra ('lineage') [CC-11b].
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-bs68-43a-glossy-deep
The lines of the palm glossy and deep.
Bṛhat Saṁhitā 68.43 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
What the text says
Riches.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-bs68-43b-otherwise-poor
The lines otherwise than glossy and deep. Iyer's English says only 'if otherwise' - the familiar gloss 'rough and not deep' is the in-copyright 1946 edition's wording and is NOT Iyer's, so it is not attributed to him here [CC-9].
Bṛhat Saṁhitā 68.43 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
What the text says
Poverty.
“if otherwise, he will be poor”
tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, 1885
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-bs68-50b-broken-fall-from-tree
Those same principal lines broken.
Bṛhat Saṁhitā 68.50 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
What the text says
The person will fall from a tree. This is the ONLY break-rule in the men's chapter and its phala is an ACCIDENT, not a death and not an illness. It must never be laundered into 'a break in the life line means a life-threatening illness' - that is Cheiro's rule, from a different century, and it belongs in the Western file under his name.
“If the lines be broken, the person will fall from a tree”
tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, 1885
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-bs68-50c-many-or-none
Either MANY lines on the palm, or NO lines at all - the verse joins the two extremes in one clause, which is unusual and is worth preserving as one rule.
Bṛhat Saṁhitā 68.50 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
What the text says
Poverty.
“if there be either many lines or no lines, the person will be poor”
tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, 1885
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-gp-lxv-broken-danger-from-tree
The longevity line broken.
Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXV, men's section (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908)
What the text says
Danger from a tree - an independent Purāṇic corroboration of the Bṛhat Saṁhitā's fall, and the second reason the tree is not a scribal oddity to be rationalised away.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-gp-lxv-many-lines-poverty
Many lines on the palm.
Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXV, men's section (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908)
What the text says
Poverty. Corroborates the Bṛhat Saṁhitā's 'many lines' half - but note the Purāṇa does NOT carry the 'or no lines' half, so the two extremes have one witness each rather than two.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-ska-19-dark-or-broken
Lines dark, or broken.
Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 19 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
What the text says
Ill-behaved and lazy; the verse says the line bears misfortune. Read this against v. 34, where 'very dark' lines give a wealthy lord - the corpus uses darkness in two opposite senses and does not reconcile them.
Says something incompatible with 1
Both readings are shown and neither is declared correct. The texts genuinely differ, and choosing between them would be this app taking a position its sources do not.
cl-ska-34-straight-dark-clean·Classical verse·Lines very straight, very dark, and clean.Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 34 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-ska-34-straight-dark-clean
Lines very straight, very dark, and clean.
Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 34 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
What the text says
A wealthy lord. The colour term is the same one v. 19 makes inauspicious; what separates them in the text is straightness and cleanness, not the colour, and a renderer must not average the two rules into a single 'dark lines mean X'.
Says something incompatible with 1
Both readings are shown and neither is declared correct. The texts genuinely differ, and choosing between them would be this app taking a position its sources do not.
cl-ska-19-dark-or-broken·Classical verse·Lines dark, or broken.Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 19 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-ska-17-four-or-five-branched
Four or five lines on the palm, bearing branches.
Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 17 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
What the text says
A wealthy nobleman, respected by kings. Note that BRANCHES are auspicious here without qualification - the corpus has no ascending-versus-descending branch doctrine at all. That distinction is Cheiro's.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-ska-18-varna-graded-count
The same four-or-five branched formation, graded by the subject's varṇa - the verse gives a different outcome for a merchant or nobleman, for a servant, and for a celibate priest.
Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 18 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
Recorded, not transcribed
The text has something to say here, and this app does not print it. That is a decision, not a gap: what is observed stays above, and what the text says follows it appears nowhere in this app.
Editor's note: Varṇa-indexed phala, as at `cl-st-1154-varna-graded`. AstroZivi does not ask a user's caste and will not render a caste-graded prediction. Recorded so the corpus is complete.
Classical versecl-ska-24-middle-line-colourless
A line that lacks the body's own colour and is blunt at its tip. The verse applies this to the lines running BELOW, ABOVE and in the middle alike (nīca-uttara-madhyamānāṃ) - it does not single out the middle crease, and an earlier reading of this rule that did so was narrowing the text to fit v. 6's wealth line.
Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 24 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
What the text says
Poverty. Note that this is a rule about line COLOUR and line TIP, not about which crease is being read - the corpus's one general statement that a washed-out line is a poor sign, and the counterweight to v. 34, where 'very dark' lines are auspicious.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-ska-30-fine-and-arranged
Lines very fine and well-arranged.
Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 30 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
What the text says
Abundant wealth and strength.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-ska-33-regular-lines
The lines regular - sadṛśā, alike or even with one another.
Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 33 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
What the text says
One wife only, beautiful and auspicious. This is a LINE-QUALITY rule that happens to mention marriage; it is not a vivāha-rekhā and must never be rendered as one. No text in this corpus has a marriage line.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-bs70-11b-even-palm-fine-lines
A woman's palm neither depressed nor raised, bearing fine lines. The flatness of the palm is part of the observation and is read together with the lines.
Bṛhat Saṁhitā 70.11 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
What the text says
A long married life, wealth, children, and comfort.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-bs68-44a-three-wrist-lines
Three lines issuing from the wrist and reaching the middle of the palm.
Bṛhat Saṁhitā 68.44 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
What the text says
A king. The Garuḍa Purāṇa states the same rule independently at ch. LXV.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-gp-lxv-three-wrist-lines
Three lines appearing from the wrist.
Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXV, men's section (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908)
What the text says
He becomes a king. Two texts, two traditions, one rule - this is the corpus's cleanest agreement and it costs nothing to show as such.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-ska-26-manibandha
The maṇibandha-rekhā - the lines running round the wrist - counted: three, or two lying like bracelets.
Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 26 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
What the text says
Three make a king; two bracelet-like lines give wealth, fortune and clothing, and merit carried from a former life. These are the rascettes of Western palmistry, and this is one of the few features both traditions actually name - but the readings are not the same and are not merged.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-gp-lxv-women-linear-marks
Clear linear marks present on a woman's palms - the observation is the PRESENCE of distinct lines at all, not any one named line. Recorded chiefly to establish what it is not: this is the nearest thing to a marriage indication in the entire classical corpus, and it is not a vivāha-rekhā. It must never be rendered as one, and no count of marriages can be read from it.
Garuḍa Purāṇa, Pūrva-khaṇḍa ch. LXV, women's section (tr. M. N. Dutt, 1908)
Recorded, not transcribed
The text has something to say here, and this app does not print it. That is a decision, not a gap: what is observed stays above, and what the text says follows it appears nowhere in this app.
Editor's note: Strī-lakṣaṇa widowhood phala. FEATURES.md §15 excludes the character/chastity/widowhood class permanently and the palmistry overrule did not touch that exclusion. The chapter is recorded as covering it; the wording is not transcribed, and no surface may deep-link to the surrounding verses.
Classical versecl-ska-25-preparation-method
Before any reading: the hand is prepared with oils, unguents, fresh cow-dung and powders, then wiped clean, and only then examined with a focused mind. The only PROCEDURAL verse in the corpus.
Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Pāṇilekhā v. 25 (crit. ed. Zysk 2025)
What the text says
Not a prediction at all - a method. The hand is prepared exactly as a palm-leaf manuscript is prepared for reading: smeared and wiped so that the incised lines darken against a lighter ground. It is the best single sentence available for explaining what this discipline thought it was doing, and it belongs beside the readings rather than buried under them.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-hs-1388-nakshatra-scheme
The nakṣatra-cakra laid over the hand: three by three in each of the palm's four directions with Aśvinī in the middle, and three by three on each of the five fingers between the joints. Three times four, plus one, plus five times three, gives the twenty-eight asterisms.
The scheme, and only the scheme. The arithmetic closes at 28 and that much is in the verse; the cell-by-cell placement is in a figure and is not built.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-hs-1389-right-hand-orientation
The orientation of that cakra: west to east on the right hand.
This is the nearest thing to a VERSE anywhere in the corpus that mentions which hand - and note carefully what it is about: it orients the asterism map, it does not say which hand to read. It corroborates the hand rule only obliquely and must not be cited as stating it.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-hs-1390-line-meets-asterism
The point at which a line MEETS the place of an asterism on the hand.
The result is to be spoken to the querent according to that meeting-point. This is a genuine, implementable rule and the only cited bridge in the whole corpus between a palm line and the asterism engine this app already runs - the reading is taken at an INTERSECTION, not at a line and not at a region.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical versecl-hs-1391-inauspicious-regions
An asterism falling at the fingertips, or in the south or the west of the palm, as against anywhere else.
Hastasañjīvana 1.3.91 (15), darśanādhikāra (Zysk 2025, App. I) - Zysk records three MSS disagreeing on this verse's pādas
What the text says
Those three positions are inauspicious; everywhere else is auspicious. The region rule ships because it is in the verse; the coordinates that would tell you WHICH asterism sits where do not, because they are in a photograph of a diagram.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Classical diagram or critical apparatusdg-iyer-footnote-which-hand
Which hand is examined: the left for a woman, the right for a man. It sits at the diagram tier rather than the verse tier for the same reason the diagram-only line-names do - it is real, printed, public-domain and datable, and it is paratext.
Bṛhat Saṁhitā, translator's FOOTNOTE (a) attached to 70.10 in N. Chidambaram Iyer's edition (Part II, 1885) - printed in the edition's apparatus, NOT a śloka. No verse stating this rule has been located in any text consulted
What the text says
Corroborated on three sides and refuted on none, yet stated by no verse. Zysk calls it implied but 'not stated explicitly' in the Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna; his critical text of the Garuḍa Purāṇa's children-line rule specifies a woman's LEFT palm, a word Dutt's rendering of the same passage does not contain; and Hastasañjīvana 1.3.89 orients its asterism map on the right hand.
Against that, a mechanical search of the Garuḍa Purāṇa and of the 1946 Bṛhat Saṁhitā for left/right hand or palm returns nothing relevant in either. Ship the rule; say on the chip that no verse stating it has been located; never promote it to the verse tier.
Cheiro's left-is-what-you-are, right-is-what-you-make is a DIFFERENT rule answering a different question and lives in the Western file - blending the two produces the popular nonsense that a man's left hand is his past life.
“In the case of a woman, the left hand and in the case of a man, the right hand, shall be examined.”
tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, 1885
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Cheiro and Benham - Western palmistry
Cheiro (W. J. Warner, d. 1936), William Benham (d. 1938), d'Arpentigny (d. 1865) in Heron-Allen's translation, and Katharine St. Hill (1893). Public domain, quotable - and Victorian European, not Indian. Most of what is sold as 'Hast Samudrika Shastra' is this material under a Sanskrit-sounding name. Nothing in this block carries a source chip, and nothing in it may.
Can the Mount of Venus be read against the planet Venus? Both authors decline it themselves.
It is the obvious question, and the answer does not rest on silence. No Sanskrit text read for this module has a parvata of the palm at all - and the two men who standardised the mounts both disown the astrological link in print.
Modern Western chiromancywest-mount-names-not-astrological
The mounts are found to carry the names of planets - Jupiter, Saturn, Apollo or the Sun, Mercury, Mars, the Moon, Venus.
From the modern Western chiromancy of Cheiro and Benham (c. 1900) — not from any Sanskrit text, despite how it is usually sold.
Edition: William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
Passage: The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading (1900), Part First ch. I
What the text says
The man who standardised the system says the names are mnemonics. That single sentence settles the question this module was commissioned to answer: there is no astrological reading of a mount to be recovered, because the system's own author says the names carry none.
“The names which appear on the Mounts are not used in any astrological sense, but because they have been so long in use that the mention of each name instinctively brings to mind certain attributes. I use these names for I have found them a great help to the memory of the student, though any other names would do as well.”
William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
Modern Western chiromancywest-mount-cheiro-declines-astrological
A reader proposes to carry the mount names over into astrology - to read the Mount of Venus against the planet Venus.
From the modern Western chiromancy of Cheiro and Benham (c. 1900) — not from any Sanskrit text, despite how it is usually sold.
Edition: Cheiro (W. J. Warner), Language of the Hand, 1st edn., 1897
Passage: Language of the Hand (1897), on the use of the old-time names
What the text says
Cheiro declines the link for his own system, while conceding a connection may exist. Two points follow. It is a second independent Western disclaimer, from the author usually cast as the fusion's villain - and it shows that Astrological Palmistry was a named current in 1890s London, i.e. a Victorian European one, not an Indian inheritance.
“As regards the use by cheiromants of the old-time names, such as the Mount of Venus, Mars, etc., I must here state that I do not use these names in any sense in relation to what is known as Astrological Palmistry. I do not for one moment deny that there may be a connection - and a very great one - between the two; but I do not think it necessary to consider it in conjunction with this study of the hand.”
Cheiro (W. J. Warner), Language of the Hand, 1st edn., 1897
Modern Western tier - no source chip, ever17
From the modern Western chiromancy of Cheiro and Benham (c. 1900) — not from any Sanskrit text, despite how it is usually sold.
Modern Western chiromancywest-mount-names-not-astrological
The mounts are found to carry the names of planets - Jupiter, Saturn, Apollo or the Sun, Mercury, Mars, the Moon, Venus.
From the modern Western chiromancy of Cheiro and Benham (c. 1900) — not from any Sanskrit text, despite how it is usually sold.
Edition: William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
Passage: The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading (1900), Part First ch. I
What the text says
The man who standardised the system says the names are mnemonics. That single sentence settles the question this module was commissioned to answer: there is no astrological reading of a mount to be recovered, because the system's own author says the names carry none.
“The names which appear on the Mounts are not used in any astrological sense, but because they have been so long in use that the mention of each name instinctively brings to mind certain attributes. I use these names for I have found them a great help to the memory of the student, though any other names would do as well.”
William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Modern Western chiromancywest-mount-cheiro-declines-astrological
A reader proposes to carry the mount names over into astrology - to read the Mount of Venus against the planet Venus.
From the modern Western chiromancy of Cheiro and Benham (c. 1900) — not from any Sanskrit text, despite how it is usually sold.
Edition: Cheiro (W. J. Warner), Language of the Hand, 1st edn., 1897
Passage: Language of the Hand (1897), on the use of the old-time names
What the text says
Cheiro declines the link for his own system, while conceding a connection may exist. Two points follow. It is a second independent Western disclaimer, from the author usually cast as the fusion's villain - and it shows that Astrological Palmistry was a named current in 1890s London, i.e. a Victorian European one, not an Indian inheritance.
“As regards the use by cheiromants of the old-time names, such as the Mount of Venus, Mars, etc., I must here state that I do not use these names in any sense in relation to what is known as Astrological Palmistry. I do not for one moment deny that there may be a connection - and a very great one - between the two; but I do not think it necessary to consider it in conjunction with this study of the hand.”
Cheiro (W. J. Warner), Language of the Hand, 1st edn., 1897
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Modern Western chiromancywest-mount-apollo-sun-naming
The mount at the base of the ring finger is met under two different names, Apollo and the Sun.
From the modern Western chiromancy of Cheiro and Benham (c. 1900) — not from any Sanskrit text, despite how it is usually sold.
Edition: William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing); Cheiro, Language of the Hand, 1897; Katharine St. Hill, The Grammar of Palmistry, London 1893
Passage: The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading (1900), Part First ch. XXI (Mount of Apollo)
What the text says
They are one name, not two systems. Benham licenses the synonym himself; Cheiro's own text overwhelmingly prefers the Sun; St. Hill uses Apollo throughout. So calling it Sūrya or Ravi in Hindi is a plain translation of a name the Western tradition already uses - it is NOT, on its own, evidence of a manufactured Indian pedigree.
What remains refused is the cross-reading of the mount against the graha, which no author licenses.
“This Mount, from its brilliancy, has also been called the Mount of the Sun, and the Line of Apollo … has been called the Line of the Sun, or of Brilliancy.”
William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing); Cheiro, Language of the Hand, 1897; Katharine St. Hill, The Grammar of Palmistry, London 1893
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Modern Western chiromancywest-mount-jupiter
The cushion of flesh at the base of the first (index) finger is developed.
From the modern Western chiromancy of Cheiro and Benham (c. 1900) — not from any Sanskrit text, despite how it is usually sold.
Edition: William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
Passage: The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading (1900), Part First ch. XIX (Mount of Jupiter)
What the text says
Ambition, leadership, religion and self-assertion.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Modern Western chiromancywest-mount-saturn
The cushion at the base of the second (middle) finger is developed.
From the modern Western chiromancy of Cheiro and Benham (c. 1900) — not from any Sanskrit text, despite how it is usually sold.
Edition: William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
Passage: The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading (1900), Part First ch. XX (Mount of Saturn)
What the text says
Soberness, prudence and gravity. Benham makes this mount the balance of the hand - the check on whatever the other mounts push toward.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Modern Western chiromancywest-mount-apollo
The cushion at the base of the third (ring) finger is developed.
From the modern Western chiromancy of Cheiro and Benham (c. 1900) — not from any Sanskrit text, despite how it is usually sold.
Edition: William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
Passage: The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading (1900), Part First ch. XXI (Mount of Apollo)
What the text says
Art, brilliance and celebrity - the faculty of being seen doing a thing well.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Modern Western chiromancywest-mount-mercury
The cushion at the base of the fourth (little) finger is developed.
From the modern Western chiromancy of Cheiro and Benham (c. 1900) — not from any Sanskrit text, despite how it is usually sold.
Edition: William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
Passage: The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading (1900), Part First ch. XXII (Mount of Mercury)
What the text says
Commerce, science, medicine and oratory. Benham presses the type's bad side harder than any other in the book - the same quickness turned to shrewdness and deceit - and a corpus that prints only the flattering half misrepresents him.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Modern Western chiromancywest-mount-mars-upper
The percussion of the palm above the head line is full.
From the modern Western chiromancy of Cheiro and Benham (c. 1900) — not from any Sanskrit text, despite how it is usually sold.
Edition: William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
Passage: The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading (1900), Part First ch. XXIII (Mount of Mars)
What the text says
Resistance, resignation and passive courage - the power to endure rather than to attack. Mars is three regions in Benham, not one, and this is the first of them.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Modern Western chiromancywest-mount-mars-lower
The region under the beginning of the life line and above the Mount of Venus is full.
From the modern Western chiromancy of Cheiro and Benham (c. 1900) — not from any Sanskrit text, despite how it is usually sold.
Edition: William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
Passage: The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading (1900), Part First ch. XXIII (Mount of Mars)
What the text says
Aggression - the active side of the Martian nature, as against Upper Mars's endurance.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Modern Western chiromancywest-mount-mars-plain
The centre of the palm - the Plain of Mars - is judged for its depth and hardness.
From the modern Western chiromancy of Cheiro and Benham (c. 1900) — not from any Sanskrit text, despite how it is usually sold.
Edition: William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
Passage: The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading (1900), Part First ch. XXIII (Mount of Mars)
What the text says
Temper and drive. Benham records that the earlier tradition rated this region above both Mars mounts, which is worth carrying because modern summaries drop the Plain entirely.
“in the earlier history of Palmistry the Plain of Mars was considered to be the principal part of the Martian development”
William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Modern Western chiromancywest-mount-moon
The percussion below Upper Mars, judged twice - once by the outward bulge seen from the side, once by the pad felt on the inner face of the palm.
From the modern Western chiromancy of Cheiro and Benham (c. 1900) — not from any Sanskrit text, despite how it is usually sold.
Edition: William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
Passage: The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading (1900), Part First ch. XXIV (Mount of the Moon)
What the text says
Imagination. The double judgement is Benham's own requirement and it is the part usually dropped: a mount that bulges outward without an inner pad, or the reverse, is not the same mount.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Modern Western chiromancywest-mount-venus
The ball at the base of the thumb, enclosed by the line of life.
From the modern Western chiromancy of Cheiro and Benham (c. 1900) — not from any Sanskrit text, despite how it is usually sold.
Edition: William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
Passage: The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading (1900), Part First ch. XXV (Mount of Venus)
What the text says
Love, music, the family affections - and, in Benham's frame, the physical vitality that feeds them. It is the largest of the mounts, which is why it is the one where he states the three-state grading in full.
“has the largest prominence shown by any of the Mounts”
William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Modern Western chiromancywest-mount-grading
A mount is graded against the rest of the hand: excessive (out of proportion, highly coloured, deeply grilled), normal (in proportion with the rest of the hand), or deficient.
From the modern Western chiromancy of Cheiro and Benham (c. 1900) — not from any Sanskrit text, despite how it is usually sold.
Edition: William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
Passage: The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading (1900), Part First chs. XVIII, XXV
What the text says
The grading is three-state and never two. An excessive mount is not a stronger good - Benham reads excess as the type turned against itself, and it is the state most often mis-sold as strength.
“an absence of any development … a flat and flabby appearance”
William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Modern Western chiromancywest-mount-apex
The skin ridges on a mount are traced to the small triangle where they meet; its centre is the mount's apex.
From the modern Western chiromancy of Cheiro and Benham (c. 1900) — not from any Sanskrit text, despite how it is usually sold.
Edition: William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
Passage: The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading (1900), Part First ch. XVIII (how the Mounts are judged)
What the text says
The apex, not the fleshiest point, is where a mount is located and from which displacement is measured. Benham's own term for the figure is the capillary triangle; 'triradius' is twentieth-century dermatoglyphics and must not be put in his mouth.
“It is the centre of the capillary triangle which is its apex.”
William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Modern Western chiromancywest-mount-displacement
A mount's apex is pulled toward a neighbouring mount rather than sitting at its centre.
From the modern Western chiromancy of Cheiro and Benham (c. 1900) — not from any Sanskrit text, despite how it is usually sold.
Edition: William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
Passage: The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading (1900), Part First ch. XVIII (how the Mounts are judged)
What the text says
The mount it leans toward is the stronger of the two, and the leaning mount gives up PART of its type to it - part, not most.
The version repeated everywhere else, in which the leaning mount surrenders most of what it is, is not Benham's rule at all: it comes from a 1960 Bombay book that is still in copyright, and it is materially stronger than the source it is credited to.
“If the apex is pulled toward another Mount, it allows that the Mount toward which it leans is the stronger, and it gives up part of its type to the stronger Mount.”
William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Modern Western chiromancywest-mount-signs-good
A star, a triangle, a circle, a single vertical line, a square or a trident is found on a mount.
From the modern Western chiromancy of Cheiro and Benham (c. 1900) — not from any Sanskrit text, despite how it is usually sold.
Edition: William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
Passage: The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading (1900), Part First ch. XVIII (how the Mounts are judged)
What the text says
These are Benham's strengthening signs. They intensify whatever the mount already is; on an excessive mount that is not a benefit, which is why the sign is read after the grading and never before it.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Modern Western chiromancywest-mount-signs-bad
A cross-bar, a cross, an island, a dot or a grille is found on a mount.
From the modern Western chiromancy of Cheiro and Benham (c. 1900) — not from any Sanskrit text, despite how it is usually sold.
Edition: William G. Benham, The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading, New York, 1900 (1912 printing)
Passage: The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading (1900), Part First ch. XVIII (how the Mounts are judged)
What the text says
Benham's signs of defect. Under Cheiro's method rule, a single one of them settles nothing on its own - it must be repeated elsewhere in the hand before it is stated as a finding.
What do you see?
Undetermined
No observation was supplied for this mark, so nothing is asserted either way. A mark nobody looked for is not a mark that is absent.
Aṅga Sāmudrika - face, eyes, moles, marks and feet
Face, eyes, moles, marks on the body, and the feet - from Bṛhat Saṁhitā ch. 68 (the twelve heads and the rāja-lakṣaṇa census), Garuḍa Purāṇa LXV, Bṛhat Jātaka V, and two later compendia. This is a catalogue you read, not a verdict you receive: every statement below is phrased as what the chapter says, and none of it is phrased as what will happen to you.
Strī-lakṣaṇa character, chastity and widowhood phala, sex-of-child correlations and every medical outcome are recorded as covered and never transcribed.
Classical tier - cited to chapter and verse1
Every rule in this block comes from a named Sanskrit text at chapter and verse, with the edition stated. Press the Source chip to see the text, the translator and what the licence permits.
Classical versecl-nails-husk
The nails are like husk.
Bṛhat Saṁhitā 68.41 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
Recorded, not transcribed
The text has something to say here, and this app does not print it. That is a decision, not a gap: what is observed stays above, and what the text says follows it appears nowhere in this app.
Editor's note: The verse's term is a slur in both witnesses, and any faithful rendering is a claim about a person's sex characteristics. Recorded, never rendered.
Bṛhat Jātaka V.24 - the drekkāṇa body map
Bṛhat Jātaka V.24 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, 1885)
Take the drekkāṇa of the lagna (its longitude mod 30° - 0–10, 10–20 or 20–30) and read that column; the rows are whole-sign houses from the lagna. The table is mirror-symmetric about the 1st/7th axis: 2↔12, 3↔11, 4↔10, 5↔9 and 6↔8 are the same organ, right and left. This app does not compute it from anybody's chart - it is the table the verse reads against, printed so you can.
Body parts by house and rising drekkāṇa
House
1st drekkāṇa
2nd drekkāṇa
3rd drekkāṇa
1
Head
Neck
Lower abdomen
2
Right eye
Right arm
Generative organ
3
Right ear
Right hand
Right testicle
4
Right nostril
Right side
Right thigh
5
Right temple
Right breast
Right knee
6
Right cheek
Right side of the belly
Right ankle
7
Mouth
The navel
The feet
8
Left cheek
Left side of the belly
Left ankle
9
Left temple
Left breast
Left knee
10
Left nostril
Left side
Left thigh
11
Left ear
Left hand
Left testicle
12
Left eye
Left arm
Anus
Bṛhat Saṁhitā 70.24 - ten twelve-year bands, and their limbs
Bṛhat Saṁhitā 70.24 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
The arithmetic is Iyer's own note: a hundred and twenty years at most, twelve years to a band. All ten limbs sit in stanza 24 alone - the widely-quoted '70.24–26' is another edition's numbering, and there is no 70.25 or 70.26 in this print.
Ten bands, their ages and their limbs
Band
Ages
Limb
1
0–12
The feet and ankles
2
12–24
The shanks and knees
3
24–36
The thighs and the generative organ
4
36–48
The loins and the navel
5
48–60
The belly
6
60–72
The breast and bosoms
7
72–84
The shoulders
8
84–96
The neck and lips
9
96–108
The eyes and brows
10
108–120
The forehead and the head
The Pañca-mahāpuruṣa bridge - Bṛhat Saṁhitā ch. 69
This is the only place in the corpus where the chart and the body meet. The five Mahāpuruṣa yogas are computed from a chart; ch. 69 gives those same five types a set of hand-and-sole line figures. They are two independent descriptions, and they are put side by side for one purpose: so you can check one against the other yourself.
One figure, more than one type - which is why a hand cannot be read back to a chart
Ch. 69 gives hand-and-sole figures to four of the five types. Those lists name 27 distinct figures between them, and 6 of those appear under more than one type. A figure therefore cannot identify a type: the chapter never made the sets disjoint. The table below is computed from the figure lists, not asserted.
Figures claimed by more than one Mahāpuruṣa type
Figure
Claimed by
club
Bhadra (Mercury) · Rucaka (Mars)
conch-shell
Bhadra (Mercury) · Haṁsa (Jupiter)
garland
Śaśa (Saturn) · Haṁsa (Jupiter)
lotus
Bhadra (Mercury) · Haṁsa (Jupiter)
lyre
Śaśa (Saturn) · Rucaka (Mars)
trident
Śaśa (Saturn) · Rucaka (Mars)
And if the sets were disjoint, the text still would not license the inference. The chapter attributes figures to a type; it nowhere reads the type back from the figures. The overlap only adds that here the mistake is not even available.
Birth details
The Pañca-mahāpuruṣa yogas are computed from a chart. Add birth details and they appear here, beside the ch. 69 marks you can hold up against your own hand.
Mālavya has no line-figure verse, and the one next to it does not stand in
Bṛhat Saṁhitā ch. 69 gives palm-and-sole line figures to four of the five Mahāpuruṣa types. Mālavya is not one of them: his verses, 69.10–12, describe a face, arms, a country and a lifespan, and no lines at all. Nothing has been substituted for the missing verse.
Bṛhat Saṁhitā 69.10–12 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
Below is the verse it is tempting to fill it with. 69.33 makes the Jaghanya an attendant of the Mālavya puruṣa and 69.34 gives him line figures - but the Jaghanya is a Saṅkīrṇa attendant, not one of the five. It is printed as catalogue only: no observation is asked for it, because the app computes nothing that would identify an attendant type.
Classical versecl-bs-69-34-jaghanya-figures
On the hands, the feet and the breast, lines forming the figures of a sword, a spear, a string or an axe.
Bṛhat Saṁhitā 69.34 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
What the text says
These are the figures of the Jaghanya, one of the five Saṅkīrṇa attendant types of 69.31 - said at 69.33 to serve under the Mālavya puruṣa. It is NOT one of the five Mahāpuruṣas, the app computes nothing that would identify it, and it is recorded only to keep it out of the Mālavya slot it sits next to.
Note also that it is the chapter's only figure rule to read the breast as well as the hands and feet.
“the lines in his hand, feet and breast will be of the shape of a sword, a spear, a string or an axe.”
tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, 1885
One verse, read twice - and that is not a disagreement
4 verses are encoded twice in this corpus, from opposite directions: once conditioned on the CHART ("the chart produces the Bhadra type, so these figures follow") and once conditioned on the OBSERVATION ("these are the figures you look for"). Both are the same verse in the same edition, so presenting them as a disagreement between sources would be false. They are listed here so that meeting both readings in different parts of this page is not confusing.
Bṛhat Saṁhitā 69.17 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
Bṛhat Saṁhitā 70.10 (tr. N. Chidambaram Iyer, Part II, 1885)
cl-bs70-10-figures-queen · cl-foot-figures-bs70
About the sources: where the source's own words appear, they are from a public-domain edition and the translator is named on screen - N. Chidambaram Iyer for the Bṛhat Saṁhitā and Bṛhat Jātaka, M. N. Dutt for the Garuḍa Purāṇa, and the authors' own editions on the Western side. Where an edition may not be quoted, the wording here is the app's own prose instead. For educational purposes; nothing on this page is a medical claim of any kind.