FALL OF NEW OTTOMAN EMPIRE -TURKEY DEFEATED

'Together we can rule the galaxy.' Egypt's then President Mohamed Morsi (left) poses with Turkey's

then Prime Minister (now President) Recep Tayyip Erdogan, before Morsi was overthrown and jailed.

Shortly after the Arab Spring rocked several capitals in the Middle East, the Turks devised a plan that would enable their country to emerge as the new Ottoman Empire. While deliberately and systematically antagonizing Israel, Ankara would: replace the Shia-controlled Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad with a Turkey-friendly Sunni ruler; support the Sunni in Iraq and Lebanon and boost their political influence; support Hamas in the Palestinian territories and provoke it to violence against Israel; and make sure that the Muslim Brotherhood or their various brethren rule Egypt, Tunisia and Libya. Saudis were already "our Muslim brothers." Eventually, all former Ottoman lands would produce governments subservient to the emerging Turkish Empire.
Nearly four years later, Syria's Assad is comfortably sitting in his presidential palace in Damascus and possibly laughing at the mess the Turks created by supporting Syria's jihadists. These jihadists have only wreaked havoc along Turkey's nearly 900-mile-long borders with both Syria and Iraq.
The Shia in Iraq are as powerful as before, and remain obedient to Turkey's regional sectarian rival, Iran.
The Shia in Lebanon -- where Turks are a high-value currency on the hostage market -- are increasingly hostile to Turkey.
No one knows who rules Libya after the downfall of Colonel Qaddafi, but none of the warring factions want any Turks meddling in the former Ottoman colony.
Meanwhile, a coup in July 2013 toppled the Turks' most-trusted regional ally, Egypt's then president, Mohamed Morsi. Today, not only the Turks but also Turkish products -- including even soap operas -- are unwanted in Egypt.
With the downfall -- ironically, instead of Assad -- of their Islamist allies in the region, the Turks recently discreetly moved to win back Egypt, the most populous Muslim nation in the region.
Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu asked to meet with his Egyptian counterpart, Sameh Hassan Shorky Selim, on the sidelines of the UN summit in September. The Egyptian minister abruptly cancelled the meeting, citing Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's "insulting words about [Egyptian] President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi." A statement from the Egyptian foreign ministry called Erdogan's words "lies and fabrication."
More recently, Cairo announced that it would not renew a three-year transit trade agreement with Turkey. The decision indicates a further worsening of bilateral ties, which had been downgraded, as in the instance of Israel, to the level of chargé d'affaires. The transit trade agreement, signed in 2012 when Morsi was in power, had facilitated Turkish exports to African nations and the Gulf through Egypt's mainland, via Egyptian ports. Turkish companies previously sent their cargo to Gulf and African customers through Syria, when relations with Syria were normal. After Erdogan chose cold war with Syria, the Syrian route was closed to the Turks. The Turks then signed the transit deal with Egypt to use their ports and mainland as the alternative route. Now that Egypt will terminate this agreement, Turkish companies will be deprived of an easy route to Gulf and African customers.
Ironically, only six weeks before General al-Sisi ousted Egypt's Islamist President Morsi, Turkey had granted Egypt a $250 million loan to finance Turkish-Egyptian joint defense projects. The loan, the first of its kind, was intended to boost defense cooperation and Turkish exports of defense equipment to Egypt. At that time, Turkey was hoping to sell Egypt scores of Turkish-made drones, tactical naval boats and helicopters.
Egypt's hostile move was a "shock" to Ankara, but only to Ankara. "Apparently everyone dealing with the Egyptians knew this was coming, except the Turks," said one EU ambassador in Ankara.
It was not a secret that Egypt and the Turks' "Muslim brothers, Saudi Arabia" aggressively lobbied against Turkey's failed bid in September to win the seat of the non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. The EU ambassador said: "There may be further Egyptian moves to retaliate against Turkish hostilities. After Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Lebanon and Israel, Turkey has completely lost Egypt."
That mishap left Turkey's Islamists with one ideological ally in the former Ottoman lands: Tunisia, where the Muslim Brotherhood-inspired Ennahda party was in a coalition government -- until this past weekend.
Ennahda, the first Islamist movement to secure power after the 2011 Arab Spring revolts, conceded defeat in elections that are expected to make its main secular rival, Nidaa Tounes party, the strongest force in parliament.
This defeat is a huge setback for Erdogan's Tunisian ideological allies, who had headed a coalition government with two non-religious partners for more than two years.
Tunisia was the final chapter in Erdogan's book of defeat. Neo-Ottomanism was a childish dream. It is, now, a "sealed" childish dream.
In the entire Middle East, Turkey now has only two allies: Qatar, which looks more like a rich, family-owned gas station than a state; and Hamas, a terrorist organization. But Turkey has a rich menu of hostilities: Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, (discreetly) Jordan, Israel, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, (as always) Cyprus, (now) Tunisia, (also discreetly) Morocco and Algeria, and (most warring factions of) Libya.
In an April 2012 speech, then Foreign Minister Davutoglu defined Turkey's policy goal as: "On the historic march of our holy nation, the AK Party signals the birth of a global power and the mission for a new world order. This is the centenary of our exit from the Middle East... whatever we lost between 1911 and 1923, whatever lands we withdrew from, from 2011 to 2023 we shall once again meet our brothers in those lands. This is a ... historic mission."
That was a not-so-covert message of a strategic goal of reviving the Empire. Only nine years before the deadline to "meet our brothers" and the birth of Turkey as "a global power with a mission to build a new world order," Turkey looks rather dramatically isolated.

Burak Bekdil, based in Ankara, is a Turkish columnist for the Hürriyet Daily and a Fellow at the Middle East Forum.

Book of defeat
 

RANI ROOPMATI -HER LOVE FOR COWARD BAJ BAHADUR

BETRAYAL OF FOOLISH RANI ROOPMATI AND HER LOVE FOR THE ISLAMIC COWARD AND MURDERER BAZ BAHADUR

SCENE : MANDU THE ANCIENT HINDU FORT OF CENTRAL PROVINCE !!

Rani Rupmati, also spelt Roopmati, was a Hindu singer of Malwa. Baz Bahadur, ever so fond of music, was the last independent ruler of Mandu. Once out hunting, Baz Bahadur chanced upon a shepherdess frolicking and singing with her friends. Smitten by both her enchanting beauty and her melodius voice, he begged Roopmati to accompany him to his capital. Roopmati agreed to go to Mandu on the condition that she would live in a palace within sight of her beloved and venerated river, Narmada. Thus was built the Rewa Kund at Mandu.


AKBAR'S GENERAL .. Adham Khan was prompted to conquer Mandu partly due to stories of Rupmati's beauty. When Adham Khan marched on the fort Baz Bahadur met him with his small force and was defeated and coward Baz Bahadur fled to Chittorgarh to seek help. As Adham khan came to Mandu, was surprised by the beauty of Roopmati and Rani Roopmati stoically poisoned herself to avoid capture.,

Thus ending the magical love story ended in the betrayal of Roopmati's foolish confidence in her choosen husband who abandoned her for the safety of his other henchmen ...and this story is repeated with every woman who goes to the MLECHHAS !!

PAINTING : The Defeat of Baz Bahadur of Malwa by the Mughal Troops, while Rani Roopmati, and her female companions, view the scene from the terrace of the fort. 1561- Akbarnama, ca 1590-95.

DISTORTED INDIAN HISTORY BY BRITISHERS FOLLOWED BY BROWN BRITISHERS IN INDIA/BHARAT

The history writing by the British was a deliberate and systematic effort. The British used history of India as a tool for demoralizing the natives. History of India was twisted, falsified and misinterpreted on a grand scale. In a letter dated December 16, 1868 the famous Indologist Max Muller wrote to the Duke of Argyll, the then Secretary of State of India,
‘India has been conquered once, but India must be conquered again and that second conquest should be a conquest by education’. (Ref: ‘The Life and Letter of F. Max Muller, edited by Mrs. Max Muller, 1902, Vol.1, p.357). Prof. Max
Muller was not just a philosopher, he was also an examiner for the Indian Civil Service (ICS) examination. Teaching of falsified history played a great part in this ‘second conquest’.* Who were these British history writers ?
They were mainly army officers and administrators of the East India Company. For example: Major General John Malcolm – A Memoir of the Central India (1824) Captain Grant Duff – History of the Marathas (1826)
Gen. Briggs – History of the Rise of Mohammedan Power in India (1829) Lt.Colonel James Todd – Anals and Antiquities of Rajasthan(1829-32) M. Elphinstone (Resident at Peshwa Court, later Governor of Bombay), History of India (1841)
Joseph Cunningham (brother of Gen.A.Cunningham) History of Sikhs (1849) Lt. R.F.Burton – History of Sindh (1851)

Thus this is akin to victors writing the history of the vanquished. How many American Western movies depict the generosity and the bravery of the native Americans? Do you know of a single British movie depicting the courage, intelligence and skill of the German and Japanese soldiers? Hence we can imagine what kind of ‘history’ these British officers and administrators must have written or the slant there in. But these very books became standard textbooks in India and were prescribed for teaching the later day examinees of the Indian Civil service and the Indian army.

British Version of Indian History :

Until the invasion of India by Alexander, there was nothing worth mentioning in India. After Alexander, the Greeks taught civilization to Indians, and gave them the Western ideas. Then came the Shakas, Huns, Kushans etc. They also kept teaching the natives. In the eighth century Mohammed bin Kasim invaded India. It marked the begining of the Muslim rule. Then came the Ghazanvis, Ghoris, Gulams, Turks, Afgans, Khiljis, Tughalaqs, Lodis and Mughals. They were very brave and noble. They carried out reforms after reforms. Lastly came the English. They could not tolerate the prevailing anarchy. ‘We rule India’ they said. Some kings accepted their protection. Those who resisted, collapsed like a deck of cards. The British taught peace and prosperity to this troubled land. Under them everyone is happy. They introduced rule of law which Indians never knew before. Thus the history of hindus (according to the British) is as dark as coal tar. There is nothing in it to be proud of. It is natural that only foreigners should rule India. The best the natives can do is to serve the British by becoming their obedient servants. Why could Indians not counter them with our own version of history ? 

Neglect of History in India :

It must be admitted in all fairness, that it was the British who first wrote the history of India. The Hindus probably are the only race, who despite having such intelligence, bravery and tremendous capacity for successive revivals, have showed such pathetic neglect of history. There was utter lack of historical sense. Lokamanya Tilak writes “Even if we read the whole of Harsha-Charita by Banabhatta, we cannot make out when did this famous king rule or what was the extent of his kingdom ? Had it not been for the Chinese traveller Hsuen Tsang (and the English scholars who translated his memoirs from Chinese into English) we would have never known the history of Harsha “. Records were not properly kept and where they were kept they were not preserved. Even today very important documents are getting rotten and destroyed by insects, in many families, but the owners will not give them to historical societies. History as a subject did not always have a place in education. For example, Maharaja of Jaipur, JaiSingh I never learned about the history of Bappa raval, Prithvi raj Chuhan, Mahmud of Ghazni, Mohammed Ghori and others. During the upbringing of Peshwa Bajirao I, he learnt nothing about the East India Comapny and its resistance to Shivaji at Surat, the history of the Mughals or the history of Maratha-Mughal struggle. Far reaching consequences of such neglect were never realized. A true historian should have the ability to doubt the validity of currently held beliefs in light of new evidence. reject the traditional line of thinking when it becomes evident that it was based on wrong assumptions or weak, flimsy foundations. Analyze the evidence critically and establish the facts based on common sense, reason and logic. All this was cleverly disallowed by the British. Historical research was reduced the drab work of compiling data and translation of documents. The faculty of interpretation was strongly discouraged. It is therefore essential that Indian history be rewritten. 

Rewriting Does Not Mean Fabrication : 

It must be emphasized that rewriting of Indian history does not mean fabrication, as was done by the Nazis or the Communists. Savarkar wrote in 1937 : “ To praise one’s ancestors out of affection for them may be foolish, but humane. However to tolerate deliberate denunciation of the ancestors without challenging the allegations is disgraceful. Because such falsehoods, if repeated often will make us lose self respect and confidence” . “Only those people avoid mention of their defeats in the past that are not strong enough to avenge the defeats “. “When writing history the writer must write the events as they happened. He should not concern himself about the effect of that writing on present situation. .. It is natural to write about glorious deeds of our forefathers, but we are reluctant to describe disgraceful event or disasters, defeats. A historian must avoid such hiding of facts. Whatever happened in the past it should be described as it happened… “

Appeasement of Muslims Leads to Falsification of History by GOI : In December 1937, Savarkar said ” Following
appeasement of Muslims, the government is now trying to pervert history. It is well known that in 1318, Harpaldev of Devagiri was skinned alive by Kutb-uddin Khilji of Delhi. This fact is hidden and the history books tell us that he was
simply arrested. Sambhaji, the brave Maratha king was also tortured to death by Aurungzeb. But history books say that he too was simply arrested. How shameless can they be! “ In the same year Savarkar wrote “ Look at the present attempt by Gandhi and his followers to suppress the atrocities of Muslim rulers and even glorify them (for e.g. Siraj-uddaula and Tipu) .. But has this perversion stopped the riots and the arrogance of Muslims? No.. It is nonsense to say that if we describe the battles or conflicts of the past, the present generation will fight battles again! “ The practice of perverting history continues. Here are some examples: In the medieval times the main source of government income was the land
revenue. Under Hindu rulers its used to be 16 %. Under Akbar it became 33 %. It stayed same under Jehangir. Under the
Golden rule of Shah Jahan it was raised to 50 % and it stayed the same during Aurungzeb who added Jizya tax on
Hindus. Under Allauddin Khilji the land revenue also was 50 %. This information is kept out of history books. We are taught that in 1303 CE Allauddin Khilji defeated Rajputs and captured Chitod Fort. But we are never told that Hamer Singh, a Rajput prince defeated and recaptured the fort 10 years later. It is well known that Prophet Mohammed fled from Mecca to Medina in 622 CE. Muslims all over the world accept the fact. But in 1982 under pressure from Muslims Maharashtra government ordered that word ‘fled’ must be deleted. So now it reads that Prophet Mohammed went from mecca to Medina in 622 CE. Even Nehru would have been amazed by this because in his book ‘Some Glimpses of World History’ he does say that Prophet Mohammed fled from mecca to Medina. In 1982 the Central Ministry of Education issued guidelines for writing and teaching of Indian history which among other things forbid describing the medieval period as a period of conflict between Hindus and Muslims. In short, Shivaji’s virtues should not be glorified and Aurungzeb’s bigotry and despotic nature must not be described! In 1982 Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) in their publication ‘Taj Museum’ admitted that on the site of Taj Mahal stood the mansion (manzil) of Raja Man Singh which was at the time of in possession of his grand son Raja Jai Singh. So what happened to the mansion ? The answer is simple. It is the same as Taj mahal. But that much ASI official would not concede. In 1984 Prof.Marvin Mills wrote Director General
of Archaeological Survey of India that the Taj dispute be settled by scientific tests on brick samples taken on 20 locations. The Director General replied “The Taj is well dated on documentary evidence .” BARC, Bombay and PRL, Ahmedabad are also seized of the problem. (this was a lie. Both the labs did not receive any samples for testing) and IT IS NOT
CONSIDERED DESIRABLE TO HAVE ANY FURTHER INVESTIGATION AT THIS STAGE.
Such has been Government of India. What about the historians?

Indian history -Real Truth

Airplane, Helicopter, and Car — All in One

In the future, travelers may no longer have to decide between an airplane, a helicopter, and a car. A new concept could make good on years of ideas from science fiction, by combining all three into one device. 
Arizona-based startup Krossblade wants to be the company to offer this to us in the future.
It recently introduced the SkyCruiser, an electric hybrid aircraft that could switch between airplane and quadcopter modes, and also be driven like a car. 
The benefit of this, according to the company, is that while airplanes are fast and efficient and can cover long distances quickly, a helicopter can take off and land vertically, eliminating the need for an airfield.  
The company wants SkyCruiser to become a point-to-point vehicle and the only thing a passenger will need to go door to door.
Though the SkyCruiser is still in the concept phase, the company is already working on a smaller version, the SkyProwler.
No price or delivery date has been set for either concept, but we are going to start studying for the driver's test now, just in case.
 

ताजमहल में नहीं जैनाबाद में मुमताज की कब्र, बच्चे को जन्म देते हुई थी मौत

ताजमहल में नहीं यहां है मुमताज की कब्र, बच्चे को जन्म देते हुई थी मौत
इंदौर। अपनी कई ऐतिहासिक धरोहरों के लिए जाना जाने वाले मध्यप्रदेश के बुरहानपुर जिले में ही शाहजहां की बेगम मुमताज की असली कब्र है। बुरहानपुर में अपनी चौदहवीं संतान को जन्म देने के दौरान मुमताज की मृत्यु हो गई थी। इसके बाद उन्हें छह महीने तक यहीं दफनाया गया और बाद में शव को कब्र से निकलवा कर शाहजहां अपने साथ आगरा ले गए, जहां मुमताज के शव को ताजमहल में दफनाया गया।

जैनाबाद में है असली कब्र

सम्राट शाहजहां की बेगम मुमताज की मौत न तो आगरा में हुई और न ही उसे वहां दफनाया गया। असल में मुमताज की मौत मध्य प्रदेश के बुरहानपुर जिले की जैनाबाद तहसील में हुई थी। मुमताज की कब्र ताप्ती नदी के पूर्व में आज भी स्थित है। इतिहासकारों के अनुसार लोधी ने जब 1631 में विद्रोह का झंडा उठाया था तब शाहजहां अपनी पत्नी मुमताज महल को लेकर बुरहानपुर आ गया था। उन दिनों मुमताज गर्भवती थी। सात जून 1631 में बच्चे को जन्म देते समय उसकी मौत हो गई। दूसरे दिन गुरुवार की शाम उसे वहीँ आहुखाना के बाग में दफना दिया गया। यह इमारत आज भी खस्ता हाल में है। इतिहासकारों के मुताबिक मुमताज की मौत के बाद शाहजहां का मन हरम में नहीं रम सका। कुछ दिनों के भीतर ही उसके बाल सफ़ेद हो गए। बादशाह जब तक बुरहानपुर में रहे नदी में उतरकर बेगम की कब्र पर हर जुमेरात को वहां गया। जिस जगह मुमताज की लाश रखी गई थी उसकी चारदीवारी में दीये जलाने के लिए आले बने हैं। यहां 40 दिन तक दीये जलाए गए। कब्र के पास एक इबादतगाह भी मौजूद है। एक दिन उसने मुमताज की कब्र पर हाथ रखकर कसम खाई कि तेरी याद में एक ऐसी इमारत बनवाऊंगा, जिसके बराबर की दुनिया में दूसरी नहीं होगी। बताते हैं कि शाहजहां की इच्छा थी कि ताप्ती नदी के तट पर ही मुमताज कि स्मृति में एक भव्य इमारत बने। शाहजहां ने ईरान से शिल्पकारों को जैनाबाद बुलवाया। शिल्पकारों ने ताप्ती नदी के का निरीक्षण कर इस जगह पर कोई इमारत बनाने से मना कर दिया। तब शहंशाह ने आगरा की और रुख किया। जिस स्थान पर आज ताजमहल है उसको लेकर लोगों के अलग-अलग मत है।

लाश लाने खर्च हुए आठ करोड़

कहा जाता है कि इसे बनाने के लिए ईरान, तुर्की, फ़्रांस और इटली से शिल्पकारों को बुलया गया। उस समय वेनिस से प्रसिद्ध सुनार व जेरोनियो को बुलवाया गया था. शिराज से उस्ताद ईसा आफंदी भी आए, जिन्होंने ताजमहल कि रूपरेखा तैयार की थी। उसी के अनुरूप कब्र की जगह तय की गई। 22 सालों बाद जब इसका काम पूरा हो गया तो मुमताज के शव को पुनः दफनाने की प्रक्रिया शुरू हुई। बुरहानपुर के जैनाबाद से मुमताज के जनाजे को एक विशाल जुलूस के साथ आगरा ले जाया गया और ताजमहल के गर्भगृह में दफना दिया गया। जुलूस पर उस समय आठ करोड़ रुपये खर्च हुए थे।

 

 

बुरहानपुर में ही असली कब्र

बुहरानपुर स्टेशन से लगभग दस किलोमीटर दूर शहर के बीच बहने वाली ताप्ती नदी के उस पर जैनाबाद (फारुकी काल), जो कभी बादशाहों की शिकारगाह (आहुखाना) हुआ करता था। दक्षिण का सूबेदार बनाने के बाद शहजादा दानियाल ने इस जगह को अपने पसंद के अनुरूप महल, हौज, बाग-बगीचे के बीच नहरों का निर्माण करवाया। लेकिन 8 अप्रेल 1605 को मात्र तेईस साल की उम्र मे सूबेदार की मौत हो गई। इसके बाद आहुखाना उजड़ने लगा। जहांगीर के शासन काल में अब्दुल रहीम खानखाना ने ईरान से खिरनी एवं अन्य प्रजातियों के पौधे मंगवाकर आहुखाना को फिर से ईरानी बाग के रूप में विकसित कराया। इस बाग का नाम शाहजहां की पुत्री आलमआरा के नाम पर रखा गया।

बादशाहनामा के लेखक अब्दुल हामिद लाहौरी साहब के मुताबिक शाहजहां की प्रेयसी मुमताज महल की जब प्रसव के दौरान मौत हो गई तो उसे यहीं पर स्थाई रूप से दफ़न कर दिया गया था। जिसके लिए आहुखाने के एक बड़े हौज़ को बंद करके तल घर बनाया गया और वहीँ पर मुमताज के जनाजे को छह माह रखने के बाद शाहजहां का बेटा शहजादा शुजा, सुन्नी बेगम और शाह हाकिम वजीर खान, मुमताज के शव को लेकर बुहरानपुर के इतवारागेट-दिल्ली दरवाज़े से होते हुए आगरा ले गए. जहां पर यमुना के तट पर स्थित राजा मान सिंह के पोते राजा जय सिंह के बाग में में बने ताजमहल में सम्राट शाहजहां की प्रेयसी एवं पत्नी मुमताज महल के जनाजे को दोबारा दफना दिया गया।

Akhtarkhanakela.blogspot.com

ढाई साल वृश्चिक राशि में रहेगा शनि

ढाई साल वृश्चिक राशि में रहेगा शनि
28 साल बाद शनि महाराज 2 नवंबर की अर्धरात्रि 12.54 बजे तुला को छोड़कर वृश्चिक राशि में प्रवेश करेंगे। इससे कई तरह के राजनीतिक, सामाजिक, प्राकृतिक परिवर्तन देखने को मिलेंगे। शतभिषा नक्षत्र एवं कुंभ राशिष्ठ चंद्रमा के समय न्याय के देवता शनिदेव वृश्चिक राशि में प्रवेश करेंगे।जो ढाई वर्ष तक इसी राशि में विचरण करेंगे। चूंकि शनि भूमि पुत्र मंगल की राशि वृश्चिक में जा रहे हैं अतः भूमि, सोना आदि लाल धातुओं, लाल वस्तुओं, पदार्थों के दामों में वृद्घि करेगा।ज्योतिष मठ संस्था के संचालक पं. विनोद गौतम के अनुसार पूर्व में शनि का वृश्चिक राशि में प्रवेश 16 सितंबर 1985 में हुआ था। शनि के वृश्चिक राशि में प्रवेश के समय चक्रवाती हवाएं अपना प्रभाव उत्तरी पूर्वी स्थिति में बनाएंगी। जिससे कर्क रेखा के आसपास वर्षा के योग बनेंगे। कहीं कहीं भारी गरज चमक के साथ शीतलहर, ओला वृष्टि तथा भूमि में कंपन आदि प्राकृतिक प्रभाव भी प्रत्यक्ष देखने को मिलेगा। यानी नवंबर के पहले सप्ताह में वर्षा होगी।राजनीति प्रभावराजनीतिक कारक मंगल की राशि में शनि का प्रभाव होगा। इससे राजनीतिक अस्थिरता देखने को मिलेगी। साथ ही कई जांच एजेंसियां भी जांच के दायरे में आएंगी।न्यायपालिका होगी मजबूतशनि के राशि परिवर्तन से आगामी ढाई सालों तक सेना, पुलिस, गोला बारूद आदि शक्तियों का भरपूर उपयोग होगा। सीमा तटीय क्षेत्रों में आतंकवाद में वृद्घि होगी। परंतु न्याय व्यवस्था में कसावट रहेगी। शनि के परिवर्तन से एक नए चमत्कारिक अविष्कार का पृथ्वी पर जन्म होगा।साढ़ेसाती से मुक्त होगी कन्या राशि60 साल से कन्या राशि में चल रही साढ़ेसाती का प्रभाव समाप्त हो जाएगा। जो कि आगामी 28 वर्ष बाद आएगा। शनि के राशि परिवर्तन से साढ़ेसाती का प्रभाव कन्या राशि को छोड़कर वृश्चिक राशि में होगा।इन राशियों पर ढैय्या का प्रभावसिंह- इस राशि में ताम्रपाद का ढय्या रहेगा। जो अचानक धनलाभ, स्त्री पुत्र सुख, संपत्ति में लाभ, प्रगति के मार्ग प्रशस्त करेगा। सेहत अच्छी रहेगी।मेष- इस राशि में ढय्या स्वर्णपाद का रहेगा। इन राशि वालों को निजीजनों से विरोध, गृह क्लेश, रोगों से परेशानी, अनावश्यक खर्च, धन हानि भय के योग रहेंगे।तुला- इस राशि में साढ़ेसाती पैरों से उतरती हुई होगी। व्यापार में प्रगति, धन धान्य समृद्घि, सम्मान, मांगलिक कार्यों में सफलता दिलाएगी।वृश्चिक- इस राशि की साढ़ेसाती हृदय में रहेगी। जिससे शारीरिक पीड़ा, रक्त पित्त विकार, स्त्री कष्ट, व्यापार हानि, वाहन भय रहेगा।धनु- इसमें ताम्रपाद की साढ़ेसाती रहेगी जो मष्तक पर चढ़ते हुए होगी। शुरू में लाभ के योग बनाएगी। स्त्री पक्ष, पुत्र, संतान सुख, प्रगित, नए कार्य की शुरुआत होगी लेकिन स्वास्थ्य में रुकावट देगी।(अन्य राशियों में शनि का प्रभाव सामान्य रहेगा।)शनि की शांतिशनि के बीच मंत्र का जाप, दशान हवन, शनिवार को सात प्रकार के अनाजों का दान, लौह पात्र में तेल दान, शनि स्त्रोत का पाठ, हनुमान जी दर्शन, शनीचरी अमावस्या के दिन शनि शांति, शनि यंत्र धारण करना हितकर होगा। -
See more at: http://naidunia.jagran.com/spiritual/vrat-tyohar-saturn-will-enter-in-scorpio-211290#sthash.jjVjub6F.dpuf