Namaskar! I am from Kattakma, Odisha, Narendra, Odisha, and I am from Sunanya Tripathi Krishnamurti World School. My question is that, how can students learn to practice Kewiri in class and learn to learn Kewiri in life? I will teach Kewiri in Kewiri. Thank you! Adhanya Pradhan Mantri Sahib, Sunanya Tripathi, who is a student who is interested in learning and practicing, is here to meet you. Please welcome, Pradhan Mantri Mahode. This is a question of the students. Is it true? Yes. These days, you feel that the students are going to lose their parents. Now, I have told you half the story, and you have caught it. There is a 24-minute syllabus. You have to speak for 20-30 minutes. You have to speak in a loud voice. And then, if you are going to lose your common sense, then you have to watch it. I am telling you about my experience of growing up with my parents. These days, the students are all the same. In my time, I was not like that. I did not have the right to teach my students. But, I have seen in Kittlikwar that the students have come to prepare. And those who forget, they do not have the right to catch the child. They ask to hide the child. So, what do they do? They see a student and say, he is very good. Why do they sit there? Why do they do this in the evening? Why do they stop? They spend 5-7 minutes on that. If they remember something in the evening, then the car will come back. Otherwise, if they think someone is laughing, they will catch them. Why do you laugh? Oh, that is the case today too. Isn't it? You are not like that. Now, the teachers are very good. You have to watch the video to learn. You have to learn to play on your mobile phone. You have to watch the video on your mobile phone. You have to do that. And if a bird is hit by a hammer, then it will go out of the hand and it will stay there. They have not fully learned the technology. They have learned some important things. And if a bird is hit by a hammer, then it will get deleted. Or it will get destroyed. And it will not get hit by a hammer. And it will get very disturbing. Even in the rain, it will get destroyed. They feel that this child is the reason for that. If a bird is hit by a hammer, then there is a possibility that it will be hit by a hammer. If a bird is hit by a hammer, then it will get destroyed. Our teachers and friends, the more you learn, the more you will become a bird. The more you learn, the more you will become a bird. This is our illusion. If a teacher feels that he is a student, if you ask him a question, then he will take your test. No. If a student asks him a question, then he will start believing him. Then he will become a bird. Always be patient with him. Be patient with him. His life is full of ups and downs. No matter what happens, don't keep quiet. Don't stop him. Be patient with him. If you don't want to answer him, then tell him, son, tell him a lot of things. And if I want to answer him, then he will have injustice. Do this. What will happen next? Come to your chamber. We will talk. And I will also try to understand you. What have you come up with? And I will also try to understand you. I will go home and study. I will also check on Google. I will ask him a question and then I will be ready. Then I will ask him another question.  Why did you come up with such an idea at this age? Then tell him love, which is not like that. In reality, he will accept it. And even today, the way he teaches, he will accept it a lot. If you say something wrong, then he will be registered in his life. And that too, there is no time to waste. Whatever we say later, then it is enough. I will ask you another question. What do you think of a teacher in a class? To get the effect of that, he will ask a very young student, whether you understand or not. Then he will keep on doing the gang. You will start with love, and then you will stop. I will work so hard, I will teach well, and you don't understand anything. What do I do if I am a teacher? That the girl is like that student. Tell her, tell her everything. What do you think of her? She will explain everything. Then the girl who is not understanding, she will be able to understand the language of that student. She will understand. And all the students, I will ask you Shreya. All the students will start learning, and will start learning independently. Second, there is no education, there is no meditation, and there is a lot of progress in the work. Teacher, tell her to speak separately. Tell her to speak separately. Tell her to speak with love. See, yesterday she was a little selfish, but now you are a rameer. Now, let's go. Today is my turn. You will also enjoy, I will also see what rames are. I mean, do the work of rames, and if you pay attention to it, it will be of no use. If you talk to her, then she will experience the feeling of being a teacher. She will not be helpless. But if you send her a face, then she will be gone. How many people will do the same? Will the same work be done? The one who is the son of Tophani, she will make a monitor. If she becomes a monitor, then she will also feel that she will have to do the work of rames. Then she will correct the son. And to keep everyone right, she will adjust the son. She will try to keep the son in control. She will try to make him a teacher. And after that, she will get the result. She will change her life. And through her, the way of the work will also be improved. So there may be many ways, but what I believe is, that you should not like the way of the wood. You should like the way of your daughter-in-law. If you like your way, then you will benefit. Thank you very much.


Oh yes, let's continue, so Paul says that he did not go to Jerusalem after his encounter on the road to Damascus, rather it says that he went into Arabia and then he says later I returned to Damascus. But then when we go to Acts chapter 9, we get a few additional details which kind of adds to what Paul is saying over here. So we'll take a look at that. So if we could go to Acts chapter 9, maybe we could begin by reading verses 17 to 19, Acts 9, 17 to 19 please. I hope you guys are back in the class. You go ahead please. Verses 17 to 19. He fell from his eyes as it had been scales and he received sight for width and a rose and was baptized. 19. And when he had received meat, yes 19 and when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was saw certain days with his disciples which were at Damascus. So he's probably helped by people and taken into Damascus after the encounter and there you have the believer Ananias coming and he places his hand on him and Saul's temporary blindness is removed and he's able to see then the believers take him and they baptize him. And then it says he stays with them. It says Saul spent several days with the disciples in Damascus. Of course, it's not referring to the 11 disciples in Jerusalem. It's referring to the believers who are there in Damascus who offer immediate fellowship to him. And then verse 20 is so significant. It says, you know, Acts 9, 20. It says, at once he began to preach in the synagogues that Jesus is the Son of God. All those who heard him were astonished and asked, isn't he the man who raised havoc in Jerusalem among those who call on this on this name and hasn't he come here to take them as prisoners to the chief priests. So here is the man who has been creating havoc among people who call on this name and now he is proclaiming this name and saying that this Jesus is the Son of God, that he is indeed divine and that he has indeed risen from the dead. So you see, Paul begins to preach his gospel at once a few days after his recovery. So I mean, I don't know, maybe it was 10 days, 12 days or whatever, you know, during which time he is baptized and he stays there with them and he begins to regain his strength and at once he begins to go around the synagogues and start preaching. So the gospel was revealed to him in the very first few initial days. It's not some great revelation that came to him much later on. And so we get to know that he begins to immediately preach the gospel that has been revealed to him by Jesus Christ and then, you know, as he starts getting more and more popular and everyone starts believing in what he has taught and they place their faith in Jesus Christ and when that happens, then we see in Acts chapter 9 verses 23 to 25, what happens, what's the consequence of his preaching of the gospel. So if we could have someone read out Acts 9, 23 to 25. When many days had passed, the Jews plotted to kill him but the plot became known to Saul. They were watching the gates day and night in order to kill him but his disciples took him by night and let him down through an opening in the wall, lowering him in baskets. Yes, so it is after many days, so we do not know how many weeks or months he continued to minister in Damascus and then the Jews, they decided, okay, fine, now this man has clearly gone to the other side, he's not going to come back to our side and so they decide to kill him and then once it says his followers helped him. So which means by now he has gained enough trust where people are willing to listen to his teaching and allow themselves to be discipled by him. So now he, in fact, he even has followers and so they rescue him during the night time. They help him escape and if you continue to read Acts chapter 9 and you go on to verse 26, you get the impression that now immediately after this he goes to Jerusalem but now because of the Galatian letter, we discover that he does not, after they let him down in that basket and he escapes from there. He actually does not go to Jerusalem. We get that impression in Acts chapter 9 because over there, you know, Luke is just condensing the whole narrative but from the Galatian letter we discover that after being let down in the basket, he goes to Arabia for a little while. So it's not that he's going to go to Arabia, going over there to Arabia, you know, to find out what the gospel is, you know, wait upon God and find out what the gospel is. He already has had a revelation. He already has received the gospel. Now maybe, you know, God is just going to give him in greater detail, more details. Maybe God is going to train him up more. So we don't really know with what purpose the Holy Spirit leads him into Arabia. So that is the sequence of events. So we have the Road to Damascus event and then after that he comes to Damascus where he stays with the believers and immediately begins to preach in all the synagogues in Damascus. His ministry goes on for weeks, months. We do not know. It doesn't specify and then there is a position. There's a plot to kill him and finish him and the followers that he now has, they help him. They lower him down in the basket and he escapes without, you know, the Jews finding out. And after he escapes, he goes into Arabia. So in Arabia, maybe God reconfirmed the gospel that has been revealed to him. Maybe the Lord gave him additional details. We do not really know. But one thing we know, whatever he began preaching right from the beginning was a revelation from Jesus Christ directly. And now here in your background, when we come back to Galatians chapter 1 verse 18, we get to know that it was three years later that the Jerusalem event happens. Because if we were to look at Acts chapter 9 verses 26 and 27, we think that maybe he immediately went to Jerusalem, but we find out here. So let's first look at Galatians 1, 18 to 24 and then we'll briefly come back to the Acts chapter 9 and then from after that we'll move on to other matters. So right now, if someone could please read out Galatians 1, 18 to 24. Master Kaneri. Please go ahead. Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter and remained within 15 days. But I saw none of other apostles expect except James, the Lord's brother. Now concerning the things that I write to you, indeed before God, I do not lie. Afterwards, I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia and I was unknown by faith to the churches of Julius, which were in Christ. But they were hearing only. He who formally persecuted us now reaches the faith which he once tried to destroy and they glorified God in me. Yes. So he's giving the details. So he says, it is only three years later that I went to Jerusalem and even then it's not like as if I went and consulted all of the apostles. I spent 15 days with Peter and then he also seems to have met James and he says, I did not meet any of the others. So you see, it's not the gospel I'm preaching. It's not something which I picked up from different people and put it together. No, it was given to me by Jesus Christ. And then he goes on to say that from there he went to Syria and Cilicia. Now just briefly coming to Acts chapter 9, 26 and 27, which gives us some details about what happened when he went to Jerusalem. What occurred? You know, because in the letter he does not give details about what happened when he went over there three years later. But even when we look at Acts chapter 9, verses 26 and 27, we get some clarity on what happened when he actually turned up over there three years after his conversion. Someone could read out Acts 9, 26 and 27, please. And when he had turned to Jerusalem, he attempted to join the disciples and they were all afraid of him. But they did not believe that he was a disciple. But Pandavas took him and brought him to the apostles and declared to them how on the road he had seen the Lord, who spoke to him and how at Damascus he had preached boldly in the name of Jesus. So he's been doing ministry work for three years now. And after three years of ministry, he finally goes to meet these apostles, the people who had been in direct contact with Jesus. So he goes after three years over there and nobody wants to meet him because they're all very, very scared of him. You know, even after three years of hearing all these bits of news that, you know, here's this man who's been preaching about Christ and all that. So they are afraid to meet him. And then it is Barnabas who takes him, you know, to Peter. I just say so here brought him to the apostles. But then because Peter tells us that because Paul tells us that he met only with Peter and with James. So we have to assume that Barnabas must have taken him to Peter and maybe later on to James. And this is what Barnabas tells. He says he told them how Saul and on his journey saw the Lord. And it says how in Damascus he had preached fearlessly in the name of Jesus. So Barnabas confirms that this person has been preaching in Damascus fear fearlessly for almost three years now. So they're not very sure how long Paul was in Arabia. But it was probably just for a few weeks or a few months because it looks like, you know, he says in his Galatian letter, I came back to Damascus. And here even Barnabas is saying that he was doing a ministry in Damascus. So he probably spent that time alone time in Arabia for just maybe a few weeks or a few months after which he goes back to Damascus. He continues his ministry in Damascus. So Barnabas is basically telling, you know, here is a man who has been preaching the gospel for three years. So he's definitely on the Lord's side and he can be trusted. And so after Barnabas kind of certifies him, then these apostles are more willing to accept him. So what is the point in him telling all of this? He wants them to clearly know that whatever he is telling is the truth and he goes on to give more details. And it's all interesting for us because we kind of begin to get a little background on Paul and what actually happened. You know, so it does help. So let's move into chapter two and look at, you know, further details that he is providing us regarding his time. So Galatians chapter two, if we could read out verses one to five, please. Then after 14 years, I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas taking Titus along with me. I went up because of a revelation and said before them, though privately before those of us in fluentia, the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure I was not running or have not running me. But even Titus was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a weak. Yet because of false brothers secretly brought in, who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery. To them we did not yield in submission, even for moments, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you. Yes. So when he went after three years when he went, he only met with Peter and with James and they must have had some personal private conversations. We don't know what was discussed. And now the next trip that he makes to Jerusalem is 14 years later. So 14 years after his conversion, he is now going for the second time to Jerusalem. And this time he goes along with Barnabas and with Titus. And at this time he goes because of some revelation that he has received. He does not say exactly what that revelation was.  So maybe it was regarding that. But he goes over there with Barnabas and with Titus. And he has a private meeting with the leaders, it says. He chooses Barnabas because Barnabas had been, you know, specifically appointed along with him to work among the Gentiles. And it looks like this whole discussion was regarding Gentiles and what the judicers are doing. So he takes Barnabas with him. He also takes Titus with him for this meeting. Most probably because Titus was a Gentile. He was a Gentile but now he was in charge of all the churches in the great region. So he takes Titus and Barnabas and he goes to this private meeting and we do not know what the discussions are. But the outcome is this. They decide that Titus, even though he is a Gentile, he does not need to be circumcised. He can continue doing his ministry. He can continue being a leader and, you know, sharing the gospel and running the church. And he in no way does he need to follow any of the Jewish rituals. That is what is decided in the meeting that they have. And so Paul says in verse 4, this matter arose because some false believers had infiltrated our ranks. You know, they were saying that you have to be a slave to the Jewish rituals and all of that. And so both he and the leaders in Jerusalem, it says we did not give in to them for a moment so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved. And so we discover that whatever Paul had been preaching, whatever Paul had been teaching for 14 years now was perfectly in sync with what the Jerusalem believers were teaching. So the Jerusalem believers could not find any defect in what Paul had been preaching all of these years. And in fact, he goes on to talk about that. If we could read out verses 6 to 10 and we look into the important points that are being made over here. Verses 6 to 10, please. Galatians 2, 6 to 10. Please read, brother. But from those who seem to be something, whatever they were, it makes no difference to me God. It makes no difference to me. God shows personal favoritism to no man for those who seem to be something added nothing to me. But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter. For he who worked effectively in Peter for the postureship to the circumcised also worked effectively me towards the Gentiles. And when James, Cephas and John who seemed to be pillars perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship that we should go to the Gentiles and say to the circumcised. They decide only that we should remember the poor, the very thing which I also was eager to do. Yes. Two very important points that we see here. First thing, verse 6, he says, as for those who were held in high esteem, he is referring to the leaders in Jerusalem. These apostles who had literally been with Jesus during his physical days on earth. So these people who are held in high esteem, whatever they were makes no difference to me. God does not show favoritism. They added nothing to my message. So they were not able to add something to the gospel which Paul had been preaching for the last 14 years. Whatever Paul had been preaching was complete. The revelation that Jesus had given to him was complete. It's not like it was lacking in any way and now these apostles added to it. No. Already what had been revealed to Paul was complete in every way. And so he says, even though these people have been held in such high esteem, they added nothing to my message. I had already received everything there was to receive from Jesus directly. And the other thing that he says is, whatever they were, however high an esteem in which they were held, that makes no difference to me. God does not show favoritism. So the point he is making is, it's true that they are people who got trained by Jesus day and night. And it's true that Jesus spent a lot of time molding them, shaping them. But God is not someone who shows favoritism because he did the same thing with me. It's what he's trying to say. So it makes no difference to me that people think that they are better trained than me because I know the truth. I know the fact that God has shows no partiality. In the same way he trained them, he trained me too. In the same way he anointed them, he anointed me too. So in the eyes of the world, they may be held in higher esteem. But in God's eyes, who shows no favoritism, I know that I'm on equal footing with the other apostles. So please accept what I am preaching as the truth. So it's the plea that he's making to these Galatians. So in fact, those leaders, when they're having this meeting after 14 years, they admit, they recognize the fact that the full gospel has been given even to Paul. And in fact, they are so glad that God has assigned them to do work among the Gentiles. And so they say, please go ahead, do the work for which God has appointed you. So they bless Barnabas and Paul and say, we are giving you our support, our right hand of fellowship. We will stand with you in the work that you are doing. And in the meantime, Peter will do the work that he's meant to do among the circumcised. So all of that they say. Only one single thing they ask for, they say, please do continue to remember the poor. And I think actually they were referring to the church in Jerusalem. The church in Jerusalem was a very poor church. You see, in these other places where you had Gentiles coming to the church, they were in a well-off position. The people in Jerusalem were very persecuted because you see, all the Jews had turned against them.  They were snubbed when they went out in public. I think we really should appreciate these people in the Jerusalem church. They were making a lot of sacrifices to hold on to their faith in Jesus. And so one thing they say, you go, you do your ministry among the Gentiles. But please remember the poor, which is why we see that later, Paul makes a collection. He collects money from all the churches and he wants to send it to Jerusalem to help those poor believers who are like, literally struggling day by day on a day to day level for their sustenance. So I think they must have been in a really poor state. And it's so beautiful that they held on to their faith in spite of all the persecution that they were facing. So except for that one requirement which they ask for, they say, you just go ahead and do whatever ministry God has committed to you.  But he was just making a very frank statement. He was not being boastful in any way when he says, you know, as for those who are held in high esteem, whatever they were makes no difference to me. God does not show favoritism. They added nothing to my message. He's not saying it in a boastful way. He's just pointing it out that in God's eyes all are equal and God assigns different responsibilities to different people. In the end, of course, when it comes to the time of rewards, God will see how sincere each person has been in the task that has been given to them. The problem with humans doing ranking is that we tend to pit one person against another. And, you know, depending on how much they are visible in the public eye and how talented they seem when it comes to human standards, based on that we tend to rank people. But God's ranking is very different. He looks at the matters of the heart. He looks at, you know, somebody is involved in the ministry of hospitality. God is going to be seeing with what attitude they are doing, how sincerely they are doing it, how many people they are reaching out to, how prayerfully they are doing their work. God looks at all of those things and then he does his ranking according to that and the rewards in heaven will be according to that. Here on earth, people look at another set of, you know, they have another set of things that they look at when they are ranking people.  There are three persons mentioned, right, as pillars, James and Peter and John, yeah.  Peter and James and John, they were the pillars of the Jerusalem church. Now, if it had not been for these leaders, probably the Jerusalem church would have collapsed. In the sense, they were under so much pressure, those believers, those new believers who were just desperately trying to hold on to their faith in spite of all the persecution that they were facing. And it was the leaders like this who helped them, who encouraged them, prayed for them, sustained them, probably went to their homes and sat with them and, you know, strengthened them in the Word of God and all of that. So, these were really pillars. They are the ones who kind of led the church through its early days and caused it to grow and caused it to become stronger until, you know, a time when pressure was off and things began to get better and people could just stand on their own. So, what these pillars or these three pillars did for the church is absolutely vital. It's amazing what they did. But then when you look at what Paul accomplished, that also was great because while these pillars were focusing on the Jerusalem church and keeping it going, they could not go to other places and spread the gospel. On the other hand, Paul was able to accomplish that. He could go throughout Asia Minor and spread the gospel. So, he did his part and God, in fact, used him to write 28% of the New Testament is written by Paul. So, who would we say is greater? Who should be held in higher esteem? We can't do the ranking because each of them in their own way try to do the best that they could with a task which had been given to them. So, whenever in our minds we start ranking people, you know, let's be a little more careful how we do that because God may not be pleased with that kind of ranking because he never looked at who had better preaching ability. Paul or Apollos because Apollos, you know, we get to know was like really fluent in the way he spoke. Amazing man. You know, you could hold the attention of the crowds. On the other hand, when Paul preached, one guy fell asleep and, you know, actually fell down from the window. So, yeah, right. Yeah, I forgot my example. So, yeah, some people may be more talented and some people may not be as talented, but ranking is not based on that. God looks at a different set of things when he, you know, rewards people for the ministry that they are doing. All right. Verses 11 and 11 to 13, if we could read Galatians 2. Okay. Relations to 11 to 13. Yes. Yeah, so Antioch is basically the place, you know, the entire region of Antioch is basically where Paul is doing his ministry. And so Peter comes over there to visit at some point of time. And when Peter comes over there on his visit, you know, he's friendly with the Gentile believers. He, when they're having the Lord's Supper, he sits along with them in their group and he eats with them. Because that's basically what the Lord's Supper represents, right? I mean, it shows how we all belong to one body. We are united, you know, by Christ and we are feeding on Him. The life that we now have, it is through Him. And that's basically what the Lord's Supper represents. And so it's supposed to bring out the unity among us. And so Peter, when he comes over here to Antioch, he sits with the Gentiles. He eats with them. And after all, Peter is the man who had that vision, you know, on the rooftop where God appears to him and asks him to eat all the animals that are there in the sheet. And he says, oh no, Lord, how can I do that? There are unclean animals over here and I cannot touch them. And then God says, what I have made clean, you can no longer call unclean. Yes, under the mosaic covenant at that stage, there were still certain things which were clean and certain things which are unclean because of the way God, you know, worked only in one single nation at that particular time. But now that has passed. Christ has come through Christ. Salvation, you know, has been opened up to all peoples who no longer need to keep the mosaic law alone to be, you know, accepted by God. So now it's a completely different story. So what now God has declared as clean, no human has the right to call unclean. So all of this revelation Peter has already received. He already knows all of that. And so he's freely mingling with the Gentiles, eating with them and treating them as equals. And then when these Judaizers come along, because they are so respected, because they're so influential, maybe their speaking skills are so excellent. When they begin to talk, Peter begins to feel uncomfortable and he does not want to have a confrontation with them. And it's very, very shocking that someone of Peter's stature starts distancing himself from the Gentiles. And do you think the Gentiles would not have observed that? Would they not have felt really hurt? Because you see he was rubbing shoulders with them and treating them as equals. But then when these people come along, he starts distancing himself. When they meet together and having the Lord supper, you know, they all sit in groups and eat, right? So he's no longer sitting with the Gentiles, he's now sitting only with the Jews. How would they have felt? And when Paul sees this, he is so upset. And so he publicly confronts Peter and he says, what you are doing is wrong. You know, he calls out Peter on what he is doing and he says, see, what you're doing is wrong. And so we kind of get the impression that these Judaizers, whoever on earth they were, were really powerful people, influential people. Maybe the arguments which they used were very, sounded very convincing. And the Gospel on the other hand sounded too simple, too basic. All the Gospel does is revolve around Jesus Christ and that must have probably sounded too simplistic. And so even Peter, who knows the Gospel and stood up for it, is now kind of using double standards. He still knows the truth, he still believes it, but he doesn't want any kind of confrontation with them. And so the safe thing to do is just to avoid the Gentiles whenever they are around. And Paul does not like this attitude. And so, you know, he kind of confronts him regarding that. So that we find in verses 14. Okay, verse 14. If you could read out verse 14, please. Ma'am, verse 14. But when I saw that their conduct was not in stock with the truth of the Gospel, I said to K-Past before them all, if you though a Jew live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?   He no longer avoids poke, no longer avoids certain foods. He goes ahead and eats everything that is placed in front of him. So even though he is a Jew, he has started living like a Gentile based on the revelation that God has given him. But now, suddenly, he is trying to avoid the Gentiles. Okay, so and now he is becoming very, very careful about keeping only Jewish customs and not eating the other foods and all of that. And the Gentile believers are observing this.  But in his behavior, in the way he is treating the Gentiles, without even speaking any words, he is sending out the message, if you guys want to be accepted, then you guys better start behaving like Jews and keep our ceremonial purity rituals and all of that. Then you will no longer be second grade people, but you will be our equals. And so, over here, the words that Paul uses, he says, how is it then that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs? But Peter never uttered a word, he never said, you people must follow Jewish rules. How is he putting force on them? Nonverbal communication. By distancing himself from them, by no longer treating them as equals, he is kind of putting pressure on them to start acting like Jews, to start adopting all the Jewish customs and holidays and rituals and all of that, to make themselves more acceptable. And Paul says this is not right. You who are not even living like a Jew anymore have no right to force other people to start following Jewish customs. So he actually confronts Peter regarding that particular matter. Yeah, we have one person raising a hand. I'll just make the point attached, you know, the point which I want to make attached to this particular thing. And then yeah, you know, we can come to the question. So all I just wanted to add over here is that sometimes a pastor or a preacher may not say something, but people don't just follow whatever is being said. They also very much follow the actions and behavior and conduct of the persons who are, you know, presenting the gospel and preaching. So it's people in leadership need to be very careful with also their conduct, their behavior. The words that they speak are important, but also their actions and their nonverbal communication becomes important because people learn even from that. So yes, that's just the point that I wanted to make, you know, in line with what is being said over here. So yes, if we could come to your Shri Kumaris, if you could come to your question, please. Thank you. Pastor, I just want to know that actually indirectly, he was actually sending a message or he was encouraging the Jewish custom. So my question is that, or is it because of the fear of what he's having on the Jews? That was the reason that he actually separated himself from the Gentile or actually he is still believing on the Jewish custom and indirectly he was actually teaching the thing. I just want to know that whether it is because of the fear of Jews he did that or he was actually encouraging the people to also follow the Jewish custom. That's my question. Whether he was moved by the fear or it was actually indirectly sending a message that you should follow Jewish custom. That's my question. Thank you, Pastor.  And yeah, then he goes on to make the point about in 11 he says, when safest came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face. So when he says, when he uses the term over here, led astray, did they start believing the teachings of the Judaizers? Not, at least in Barnabas case, maybe he began to wonder whether those teachings may be correct. So because the wording over here is Barnabas was led astray. But when it comes to Peter, what does it just say?  And then he says they were not acting in line with the truth. At least in Peter's case, I don't think Peter was led astray.  How is it that you force Gentiles? Double standards. So maybe in Barnabas case, he was led astray because the words used over there is led astray. So maybe he began to wonder whether there is some truth in what the Judaizers are saying. Maybe he began to wonder whether you need something additional, extra to believe in Jesus Christ to gain salvation. But in Peter's case, I think he knew the truth inside out. He was just trying to play it safe. He didn't want a confrontation with those persons, maybe because they were so influential. Maybe if he got into a debate and argument with them, he would not be able to express himself as clearly as them, you know. Because maybe he's not as fluent in the way he expresses himself in the way those people are able to present their case. I don't know what exactly it is, but he was being hypocritical. Is it lack of courage or is it because of fear he did that? Do you think that it's because of fear? Well, the word fear is not used over here and what he was afraid of. So we cannot be too judgmental after we're talking about Peter. So I don't really want to say anything dangerous. In the past also, he had so much fear when Jesus was actually arrested and all. So that time also he was so much fear. That's why I just wanted to know that. Okay. In the background of that, yes, he was a man full of fear at that time. But then that fear went down the drain on the day when the flames of fire came and rested on their heads. He immediately comes out, stands in front of the crowd and just preaches his heart out and there are 3,000 people added to the church that day. So he was probably not fearful anymore. But over here it may have been more a fear of, I mean, how do I express myself to those people? How do I debate with them? But to just avoid a confrontation. So it is probably more that. Not too much confidence. Thank you, Pastor. Thank you. I mean, that happens with me when some people come and start debating the scripture and they're really good at the way they express in their case. I know what they're saying is wrong, but I don't have the words to express my side of it. And rather than I just say, okay, brother, and I just leave it at that because I'm not able to express myself as clearly as them. So it could have been just that. But he should not have distanced himself from the gentiles because that would have hurt them. So that was a wrong thing to do. Thank you, Pastor. Yes. Yeah, all right. If someone could read out verses 15 to 18, please. Yeah, we're almost out of time. But yeah, 15 to 18. We are so seduced by birth and not gentle sinners. Gentile sinners. Yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ. I also have believed in Christ Jesus in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law. Because by works of the law, no one will be justified. But if they aren't aware to be justified in Christ, you too will be found to be seen as Christ than a servant of sin. Certainly not. For if I rebuild what I tore down, I put myself to be a transgressive. Yeah. Okay. Let's look at this particular verse 17. Okay. But if in seeking to be justified in Christ, we Jews find ourselves also among the sinners. Doesn't that mean that Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not. If I rebuild what I destroyed, then I really would be a lawbreaker. Okay. So just based on these verses, it looks like as if the Judaizers were saying or you people are saying that you are followers of Christ. And that you have been made righteous by Christ. But look at you people. You're also committing sins. On the other hand, at least we people who keep the mosaic law, we have all these rules. We have 613 mosaic laws and we have all these additional laws which were developed by the Pharisees. So we try to follow all of these rules. And so we are better off at avoiding sin than you people who are claiming to be righteous. So isn't your Christ actually promoting sin? You know, it's probably the kind of argument that the Judaizers were using. And so here in verse 18 Paul says, if I rebuild what was destroyed, you know, the mosaic law, the covenant which Jesus said is cancelled. If I try to rebuild that, you know what, I would end up being a greater lawbreaker than if I committed some other sin. So it's a case that he's building up against what the Judaizers have been claiming. So he says, it is true that we Christians, you know, sin. And when we sin, we go to the Lord and we confess and we repent. But a greater sin would be to bring back the mosaic law just because, you know, we are not being perfect in our walk with Christ. Just because, you know, we are still, you know, ending up in sin now and then. Just because of that, if we bring back the mosaic law and start following it to make ourselves holy. You know what, we would be greater lawbreakers. We would actually become breakers of God's law. So the solution is not to go back to the mosaic law. The solution to leading a righteous life, you know, is to live in God. And so he goes on to say, you know, I have been, he says in verse 19-20, he says, For through the law, I died to the law so that I might live for God. On that day when I made a commitment to Jesus Christ, I was symbolically crucified along with him and I died to the mosaic law. I don't need to follow that law anymore. On the other hand, how do I live a righteous life now? He says in verse 20, I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God. I'm going to trust him to sanctify me. I'm going to hold on to him and learn to walk in victory. Like it says in Galatians 5, step day by day, I will walk in step with the spirit and put to death the flesh because I have already been crucified with Christ. And in that way, I will learn to walk into greater and greater sanctification. It's going to be a process, but this process is going to happen through faith in Christ. He is going to make me holy. I am not going to rebuild the mosaic law and go back to it because that is something that God, Jesus Christ Himself, cancelled. And if I go back and rebuild it, what a great sinner I would be, what a great law breaker I would be. It's the point that Paul is making. So he basically concludes with that. He's trying to say, hold on to the gospel of Jesus Christ, trust him, follow him, walk with his help. Do not go back to the mosaic law. That is not the solution. That will not make you righteous in any sense of the word. This is the basic summation of what he is trying to bring out in these first two chapters. And then of course, in our next class, we'll go into the next few chapters. Maybe we can finish with this. It's in fact time. Let's close with the word of prayer. We thank you so much, O Lord, that you have given us a gospel of freedom, a good news of freedom. We can try to keep law after law, rule after rule on our own, O Lord, and we will not be able to do it. But if we place our faith in you and trust you to assist us on a day-to-day basis, which in fact you will do, then, O Lord, we can truly be free from sin. We can truly walk into the sanctification and righteousness which you have for us. So thank you, O Lord, that we never have to go back to rules and regulations and rituals which can never actually ever set us free. But through faith, simple faith in Jesus Christ, we can become very victorious. We can live an amazing Christian life by your power, with your help, through the guidance of your spirit. Thank you, O Lord, that the good news you have given us is really good news because you take 99% of the burden on yourself in helping us become who we are meant to be. We just have to walk by your side and cooperate with you. That's the one person that we need to do from our side. Thank you that you have given us such a good news, a good gospel. We thank you for that, Lord. Lord, I pray that you would continue to bless us even as we go through the rest of the course and even as we go through the rest of the epistols. Thank you, Lord. In Jesus' name, amen. Amen. Thank you so much. And yeah, we'll meet again next week. Thank you, Pastor. God bless you. Thank you. Thank you, Pastor. Thank you, Pastor.


You got full straps on the other side this time, so just one there and then one there. Two and then switch out of the way.


Students of the University of Lagos can now get back on campus and get ready for the second semester examinations, which begin on August the 26th. The exam to end on September the 26th, according to a circular from the school. The students were asked to leave campus six weeks ago following a COVID-19 scare. There have been having online lectures since then. UNILAC had made a staggered arrangement for students with registered bed spaces to resume in the hostels.


Hi everyone, my name is Denis and this is 15 minutes about biohacking. If you're about hacking computers, if you're about hacking emails, you might even have heard about hacking elections. But what about hacking our own body? I would start with the quote by Peter Drucker. If you cannot measure it, you cannot improve it. And we'll go through why is it important and how it affects our own lives. For that, let's take a look at a couple of simple examples of what we can measure and what has improved already. So this chart shows that in Western Europe average height of man is now 15 cm smaller than it used to be 200 years ago. And this chart shows that average life expectancy at birth is twice as high as it used to be just 200 years ago, which is cool. And because of the science progress, more accessible medicine, better living conditions, we have an idea that we're not going to stop here. So what is awaiting for humanity? Are we become superhumans or will we degrade into homocomputer ricos? These are some questions I will try to address, but I'm not going to give you an answer. So let's get back to what is biohacking? And there are actually two definitions, completely different. Biohacking is a do-it-yourself biology and ability to learn science through experiments. And also biohacking is an approach to changing your chemistry, to get better performance and improve your life and become superhuman if you wish. Let's focus for now at first one. This TED Talk of 2012 was a popularizing idea of do-it-yourself biology and hacker spaces where people from small kids to their grandparents can come and try and do some biology stuff. That was earlier available only to research institutions and big companies. So actually some things like that exist in Estonia and in many places around the world. They are called hacker spaces or biohacker slabs and things like that. So if we give the tools of scientists to average people from different backgrounds, we might get here for some disease, some really cool breakthrough in science or we might just get a beer that glows in the darkness, which is actually really cool. This thing has this beer, was grown from yeast and it has modified DNA and you can actually order a kid to do that online right now for quite reasonable price, I would say. So this is what happens right now. I like to think about biology as of computers in 70s. You know that they exist. You might have some friends who have one or use one or develop one, but it feels like super strange, you don't know what you can do right now. And I think in future more of us will use computers like we do use smartphones and they will affect many more of our lives. So let's get back to second definition of biohacking. Changing our chemistry, our physiology through science and self experimentation, self, not do this on others, and in order to do what? And I'd like you to meet Timu Arena. I met Timu in Portugal during European Innovation Academy when he was given talk about biohacking and Timu measures every aspect of his life. He's every step, every his breath, he measures it. And he takes a lot of samples, he changes the light, humidity and everything in his building to get the most out of his body, to get to his peak performance. So will in future more of us will be like Timu? Timu, who can predict whether he will get flu or not? I'm not sure if he's still able to prevent it, but at least he knows. So will more of us be cool biohackers? So what's the goal of biohacking actually, instead of just having fun and hacking stuff? To become super humans? We have evolved into what we are now through millions of years of natural selection. But now we have more and more tools to become better right now. Not our future generations, but improve ourselves. And biohackers want to get most of what they have right now with most of their body. And they do it affecting really simple things. Like exercises, we all know we should exercise. Some people do, and it's not only about doing a lot, but it's about doing it smart. It's about nutrition.  And people try to change what they eat and as Ekka has mentioned, nutritionomics, changing eating habits on the base of what your genes are and what is good for your body and not what your mother tells you or doctors. Or maybe eating the same things, but a different time. Maybe eating more often or less frequent. Also changing sleep. I love sleep. I love sleep topic. Changing the way we sleep and maybe not even sleep longer, but sleep in a different schedule. Some people experiment, try to sleep four times a day by two hours and we know that some great scientists and writers have done it. For somebody it works, for somebody it doesn't. Changing mind, meditation, music, mindfulness, understanding yourself. Also changing work habits. I really recommend to check out a deep workbook which is not related to biohacking but it's really cool about being more focused and doing more in less time and getting more done. So focusing on these areas, biohackers, trying to prove something. Everybody has different goals. Somebody for someone being a biohacker just means to stay healthy. For somebody it means being more productive. For somebody having more time by sleeping less. A difference. So I would walk you through a few examples of biohacking. So if you have watched Silicon Valley, this is Jared, he's on Adderall. This is a drug, it's called nautropic drug that allows you to keep really high level of attention, to write code really focused for 20 hours straight without any distractions. And people in Silicon Valley, some of them tend to use this drug. It's prescription drug and they shouldn't, but they do this just to get more stuff to their body. Whether it's good or not, I'm not going to tell you. It's for everybody up to the side. Using cybernetic device to track your biometric data. Sounds really fancy. It can be as simple as having some fitness tracker to track your steps or to have some smart bed that tracks how you sleep or doing any other things. Just using your smartphone, if you have Google Feed enabled, it does it. And this is fun part. This is what I would call dangerous science. It's not actually science. It's putting some implants into your body. It's not like something that many people do, but just put a magnet in your finger and you can feel extra magnetic field. You have a sixth sense. Some people put NFC tags into their body to be able to pay in the supermarkets with their hand, without a card, or open a door like you have a power. And are they crazy or not? Who knows? Maybe many people will do that in the future. I haven't done it yet, at least. And some reasons are more cool like having these exoskeletons like in Matrix to be able to leave heavy weights or to give disabled people ability to walk. It can be set as biohacking. You use something artificial to be able to do more.  So now when we have some feeling what biohackers do and what they try to achieve, why I'm talking about biohacking is not a science, really. It's not. Why am I talking about biohacking at scientific event? The thing is that biohacking is approach based on science and actually many of them. So genetics. We've talked about genetics.  And also nutrogenomics, what to eat depending on who you are. And it's all ruled by one science to rule them all, data science. Because biohacking wouldn't be true by hacking without the data. Right now we are able to collect a lot of data about ourselves and companies also do that, collect data about us. And we can use this data to track certain aspects of our life, the one we want to improve. So before going further, I'd like to ask you, who of you is taking vitamin D during the winter? All right. And who is drinking coffee? Okay. So congratulations. You are already biohackers. So you put something that was not in your body, it's not something that, like I don't know, coffee or vitamin D are not growing on trees. You put something in your body to feel better, to not feel depressed by dark, stone and winter, or to have more energy to finish your homework by drinking coffee or just listening to music that puts you in a good mood. This is basic ways of biohacking.  If you know that something works for you, do it. And the really cool thing about biohacking compared to medicine, you don't need to get approvals for everything. You don't need this particular thing to work for all humans on Earth. If it works for you, go for it. So you can try something and these things that we are all doing, they are a form of biohacking. But now let me talk about sleep. I hope you're not falling asleep right now, but you will hopefully fall asleep today. And I really love sleep, but I do not have perfect sleeping habits and many students don't as well. So let's talk about Bob. Bob is a student. And he has social life. He has assignments at midnight that he has to complete. And he just don't, he can't or he doesn't want to allocate 8 hours sleep every night. But he wants to wake up in the morning with a good mood and be able to do some stuff that he wants to. So how can Bob as a biohacker solve this problem? Changing something that he can affect using scientific knowledge. Bob understands that what you put inside your body or your mind is affecting what you produce, your emotions, your mood, or just things that you do physically. So Bob goes through some papers and he got to know that bright light during the evening reduces your ability to fall asleep. That sounds obvious, but there are studies about that. And he got to know that actually blue light helps you to stay focused during the day. The blue light of our screens, of our smartphones, I mean like they have blue light in their spectrum. It helps us to stay focused. But in the evening it kills melatonin and reduces our ability to fall asleep and sleep deeply and get good rest. So and actually if you block blue light you kind of block these effects. So how to deal with it? Bob had read some scientific things and he's looking what are tools out there to solve this problem? What can help me to use the scientific knowledge to get most of what sleep I can get? How to make it most productive? He got to know that in Windows you have a night light mode that blocks the blue light, reduces the amount of blue light in the evening. He got to know that there is f.looks app that allows you to block blue light from your smartphone, Android, iOS and the same for laptops. Windows, Linux, Mac, whatever, you have everything covered. He also got to know that if you just put hotel-like blind shades to block the light from outside light of cars passing by or street lamps he can get better sleep. But there are some things inside our room. Maybe he has a roommate who falls asleep later and he cannot force him to turn all the screens on. And this light from screens from maybe a small LED in your charger it also affects your sleep and it can disturb your sleep during the night. So there is one simple tool to fight it. Sleeping mask. And actually this sleeping mask doesn't always have to be used in an airplane. So Bob gets to know about some devices. What he can now do to improve his sleep? Sleep in the same amount of time. He gets some tracker, he puts on night mask and he actually installs f.looks on his phone. And now he sleeps like a baby in many ways. And what he realizes is that he tracks his sleep before experiment during the experiment and compares whether he slept better, whether he felt better in the morning and think whether these things really work. Do they work for him? So luckily we hope that Bob has discovered that this science really works and it works for him. So what I want to tell you. There are already a lot of opportunities to track yourself and to have some fun with biology. Things that become more and more accessible today. So about genetic tests. They're not that expensive. They still are but you can get basic DNA tests for 160 euros from 23andMe. You can get devices for 10 euros or you don't even need to get a device. With your smartphone you can track your sleep. You can track your physical activities and others. And you can buy some DIY kits or ask your friend from biology studies. And let's get back to the quote. If you cannot measure it, you cannot improve it. And there are many more tools to measure yourself and it gives you more abilities to track something and improve what you want. You might have different goals but with this mindset you can try to reach them or reach them or die trying as 50 cent used to say. So takeaways. There are many things that you can do right now and they will become cheaper, more accessible and many more things will happen. And I hope that by hacking and biology, do it yourself, biology will become a programming of tomorrow. Maybe not everybody is going to do it. Many more people will but I hope that all of us will be able to benefit from it. Like we do benefit from computers right now. So thank you and go hack yourself. Thank you very much. Now to questions. Does anybody have these sleeping issues? Problems with sleeping person? Does anybody want to implant something? What? To implant something yourself? Do you mean boobs? That's actually one of the questions. Do you like to implant something yourself like this magnet or maybe boobs? I haven't thought of that seriously but I think if there will be cool use cases, like really cool use cases, you don't, I don't know, maybe I don't pay payment with your hand. There are a lot of issues, security issues with that but it might be fun.  It's not more dangerous than tattoo or piercing. So who knows, I might try someday. Interesting questions but I think it's connected to another one. The question was why French are so not tall? And is it possible to become taller using by hacking? I don't know about French people. The French people I know, they are okay. I like them. I'm not really good at French language but people are fine and food is good. What about taller? They're actually, if you are under 30, if you look up people who do jumping and like running, there are many ways to get taller. Just, I don't know, put yourself on the bar and just hang on the bar or they have read about there is a hill and you just lay on the hill and you roll like a sausage and that's what they do to become taller for basketball players or I don't know, put some weights and jump. It all helps. I don't know, can you call it by hacking? Maybe if you put, I don't know, in Ukraine we used to have a lot of TV commercial about Rostishka from Danone. So they claim that you will, if you drink Rostishka you will grow so I'm not sure. Is it by hacking? Okay, please read the answer. Maybe one more but tricky question. Actually there is one more question. How do you evaluate your own by hacking skills? I'm a beginner. I like to try things and actually I have a sleeping mask. I bought it, like I read an article about that like even a bit of light can disturb your sleep. I don't have the super cool shade so it's not super dark in my room and sometimes I sleep with a mask and I'm not sure if I get better sleep but in the morning for me personally it's easier to wake up because it's dark, it's like completely dark and now it's completely bright and this contrast kind of allows you to wake up easier compared to when it becomes lighter slowly, slowly, slowly. So I kind of haven't got two good results with my sleep tracking but I drink coffee, I drink some... I think... whether it's hacking or not. About beer, is it by hacking or not? It could be, it could be. They changed DNA so they hacked leaving like they hacked yeast they put gene of some sea plant that involves in the dark so it's like it's really cool science. It used CRISPR like super cool technology. Okay, and I think the main question for today I think... Are you single or not? I'm not single. Here is Liza, my girlfriend, so... I don't know. Okay, thank you. Nice, thanks.


In 1903, there were two aeronautical engineers in Dayton, Ohio. It would have been hard for the Wright brothers to envision the development of the helicopter, jet propulsion, supersonic flight, and manned spaceflight. Technical progress and surprise have characterized our century, and without question will continue into the next century. Air Force Systems Command offers science and engineering people an unparalleled career opportunity. For the first time in industrial history, a science or engineering graduate coming into the Air Force or federal civil service will be trained to manage a multi-million dollar program. After a brief apprenticeship, they'll assume program management responsibilities on a one-to-one basis with their industry counterparts, though they may be 20 to 30 years their senior. At this point, they can draw on the combined experience of their engineering team, developing their expertise and management skills in a dynamic, earn-while-you-learn atmosphere. This is only the beginning. For both civilian federal service and Air Force people, there are many advanced degree opportunities. Our master in doctoral degree program offers the graduate the chance to be among the most highly educated cadre of scientists and engineers anywhere in the world. Let's look at a case in point. Today at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, the Deputy for Engineering's 1,500 people carry out the AFSC mission with its greatly expanded new technologies. They provide technical direction for the development of Air Force aeronautical systems, subsystems, and equipment. From its inception, the Deputy for Engineering has developed all Air Force aircraft. The Deputy Engineers, the Engineering Force, have evolved into the free world's unique core of technical expertise that spans all areas of aircraft weapon systems development. This is a unique opportunity for both military and civilian science and engineering people. The challenge, career advancement, involvement in the exploration of technology. Facilities are among the finest in the world for technical development of billions of dollars worth of equipment annually. The Deputy is organized into three directorates, which oversee the development of airborne avionics, flight systems, and support equipment. The Directorate of Avionics Engineering is responsible for developing the electronic devices used in military aircraft. These include systems to accomplish navigation and guidance, weapon delivery, reconnaissance data collection, electronic warfare, command and control, and advanced displays to help the pilot aim, track, and guide a weapon or to see at night. Technical direction and engineering management in the areas of flight technology, structures, propulsion, and flight equipment are provided by the Directorate of Flight Systems Engineering. One of the biggest responsibilities is the support of an aircraft weapon system. The Directorate of Equipment Engineering develops the multitude of equipment needed to support an aircraft and to keep it flying. The equipment designed by this group ranges in size and complexity from a simple test stand to the world's largest fire truck and vehicles that can routinely load or unload up to 40,000 pounds of cargo. They also design equipment to support other services such as aerial delivery of supplies to Army and Marine Corps units. A significant part of the Equipment Engineering Directorate's efforts are expended in human factors testing. This discipline ranges from ejection seats to testing of all avionics and flight system designs to determine how well people can use the new equipment and assessing the equipment's psychological impact on the users. Complex simulators have been designed to train crew members to fly all aircraft, spacecraft, and helicopters, and to become proficient in mastering specialized subsystems. In the crew station design facility, engineers and psychologists evaluate future cockpit and space station designs for maximum crew comfort, performance, and utility. The Wright Patterson community affords the Deputy Engineers access to some of the most modern scientific equipment, including that managed by the Air Force Wright Aeronautical Laboratories. To accomplish their mission, the Deputy's engineers fully exploit the excellent research and development facilities available for designing and testing each piece of aircraft and crew equipment. Support from other base organizations also permits these engineers to develop for themselves equipment that is not readily available. While most manufacturing of new flight systems is done by contractors, in-house research, development, and ingenuity have produced systems, such as an airborne C5 Minuteman ballistic missile launch, an ejection system that lessens the effect of wind blast on ejecting pilots, and a boom operator part-task trainer to train tanker crews in a simulated aerial environment. The Deputy for Engineering is the Air Force's developer of new aircraft systems and is extensively involved in the modification of existing systems as well. An extremely important development tool is the building of aircraft prototypes and the subsequent fly-off competitions. This allows the testing of advanced techniques that can be used on future aircraft designs. In the competition to build a new system, the Deputy's conclusions regarding each system's technical acceptability are the most important factors considered when making a final decision on which weapon system to procure. The most important job of the Deputy's engineers is to tie together all the technologies and subsystems and integrate them into a single aircraft system. This is a highly complex task, requiring engineers whose abilities cover many disciplines. They must ensure the airframe and engines are sized correctly. The wing is properly designed to carry various weapons. And the radar system is realistic for the aircraft. The integration engineer plays this vital role in putting the entire system together. Through an exhaustive testing program, products are systematically evaluated to assure compliance with structural and dynamic requirements. While most tests are to ensure proposed systems and subsystems meet performance objectives, others are more experimental. These are learning experiences to see what happens under certain conditions, which helps build better future aircraft. An example is the deliberate crash of this unmanned DC-6 to help us improve aircraft safety. Effects of the Deputy for Engineering's research and development efforts are far-reaching. Eight of ten commercial free-world jets are designed and built in the United States. Most trace their lineage to military aircraft programs, such as supersonic technology from the XB-70. In all, 35 of the 51 significant advances in aviation since 1935, such as the swing-wing, pressurized aircraft, automatic landing, air-to-air refueling, automatic navigation and retractable landing gear, are products of the Deputy for Engineering research and development. The nature of the Deputy's work requires the engineers to remain abreast of the state of the art, often involving work on the frontier of aircraft technology. In addition, they apply lessons from experimental technology, such as this 1950 hovercraft to new systems, such as this air-cushion landing system. The Deputy's close association with many outstanding universities keeps the educational level of its engineers high and encourages a continuing flow of innovative ideas. As a result, engineers in the Deputy have been granted large numbers of patents and have received many of the nation's highest aviation awards, which have won the organization recognition and respect from its peers in the scientific community. As it looks to the future, the Deputy for Engineering anticipates continued involvement in the development of a cruise missile carrier aircraft, an advanced cargo aircraft, laser and charged particle beam weapons, and advanced fighters, as well as continuing efforts to enhance the capabilities of existing aircraft systems. For as long as is necessary, the Deputy's engineers will continue their tradition of researching, developing, testing, and evaluating the aircraft systems necessary to preserve our nation's way of life.


Verifying the validity of crowdsourced results in open source software, why did we come up with this talk? Because someone reached out to us and asked, hey, how do we trust the scorecard results? I'm Navin Srinivasan, I'm excited to be speaking at supply chain security on this year. I'm all about open source and supply chain security. I'm one of the maintainers of Scorecard, I'm a contributor to SixTour. And then I am Spencer Shark with the Google open source security team, I was very excited to be in Austin last year with everyone and even more excited to be speaking this year. Thanks, Spencer. For people who don't know, the OpenSSF Scorecard utilizes SixTour for its remote attestations, which we'll talk about in this talk specifically. Who knows, who's this? Ken Thompson, if you don't know. Ken Thompson, why are we talking about Ken Thompson today? I happen to meet Ken Thompson in scale, scale is a, so Cal and XExpo, this year is phenomenal to see him over there. He wrote a great paper called Reflections on Trusting the Trust, if you haven't read the paper, it's a great paper to read, there are great YouTube videos which impacts that. It specifically talks about how do you trust the trust? Now given that, how do we trust Scorecard get up action results? Why? Because Scorecard is supposed to be, Scorecard is a security scorer, but how do we trust the results? That's what we're trying to unpack with this analogy. Before we dive into any of this, I thought, what is trust? The dictionary definition. Trust, the firm belief in the reliability, truth, ability, or strength of someone or something. Just making sure that we are all on the same page on this. Another thing that this talk is going to address is how Scorecard is using remote attestations to scale specifically. Why? We need Scorecard for every open source project. Scorecard comes up in different flavors right now. There's a client tool, there's a get up action, there's an API, and there's a BigQuery data set. And right now on a weekly basis, scans about a million repositories and stores those results in API server and as an API and as well as in the BigQuery table. But we want to scale not just a million repositories, we want to scale to every repository. And the limitations to scale are hardware, the get up tokens, and that's why we're using the Scorecard get up action to using remote attestations to scale, which we are specifically going to talk about in this talk. We are not six-storey experts. There are a few folks in this conference who are, but we are not six-storey experts. I just want to set the context straight for that. Before we dive deep into any of this, we thought we'll talk about what are the tools that we're using. Six-store, it's a sort of set of tools for attestation mechanisms in the open source projects. It has got a great set of tools, but we're going to talk about specifically three tools today. And those three tools are something that the Scorecard get up action uses. The first tool is CoSign. CoSign makes signatures in visible infrastructure. One of the critical things that the Scorecard get up action uses Kela signing. The Kela signing is phenomenal feature. It uses the full CO and recore. Those are other two tools of six-store. Full CO, the acronym is a free-to-use CA for code signing. Full CO is for issuing code signing certs, uses OIDC as standard protocol. Another critical thing that Full CO provides is a short-lived certificates which are valid only for 10 minutes. In Spencer's demo, Spencer would demonstrate that specifically, the 10 minutes validity of those certificates. The last tool of the six-store tool chain that is recore. Recore provides secure immutable ledger for metadata. It uses multiple tree data to ensure that it hasn't been tampered with. For folks who don't know what a Scorecard is, a tool for generating security scores in open source projects ensures the projects are secure and ensures it uses six-store tools for signing those things. So what a Scorecard provides, what are you seeing in the left side of the screen right now is the actual Scorecard. The Scorecard takes the best practices and provides score for any given open source project. It starts with 10 as the highest score, zero being the lowest score. On the right side is the QR code to go get the score for this web UI. Now that we are here in this conference, we thought what is best to have this specifically use an analogy for this talk to what the conference tickets as the standard. Issuing conference tickets and creating open source software have a common goal. The goal is to ensure authenticity and trust. We want both of them to be genuine products. The conference ticket issuance process, we go get conference tickets, which in turn provides us unique bar codes or QR codes. This makes ensure that we haven't tampered with the conference ticket and so anybody has valid ticket to enter into the conference event. Same way the project maintainers create on the open source software, the project maintenance create software, Scorecard get-of-action ensures that the project has its security scores and it's signed with six store tools to ensure integrity of Scorecard results. Coming back to the analogy summary, we want to ensure that both of them have the conference ticket ensures that we have trust and authenticity in respective domains and the Scorecard get-of-action uses six store tools to provide that. Now that we have talked about all of those prerequisites, now let's get into details of how these things work. The Scorecard get-of-action uses OIDC as a protocol to authenticate against full CO. The full CO is the tool that six store provides. The critical thing in this process is it uses an ID token as a write in the get-of-action that specifically allows it to use keyless signing to authenticate against the full CO. It captures some critical metadata that Spencer would be demonstrating part of the X509, which is going to be useful for validating the integrity of the results. What you're seeing here is the entire process of how the attestation works. I'm going to start explaining from the bottom of the diagram from step one up to step eight. Step one is the code gets committed to the repository. Usually the Scorecard get-of-action runs, merge domain or master. The step two is an opt-in feature. If the get-of-action has an opt-in to publish results, it uses the step three to use core sign to publish results to RECOR. Simultaneously, it takes those results, pushes to the web app, which is a Scorecard API. That in turn validates against RECOR to ensure it's valid. It also checks with get-of-api for the validity. All of this is the general overview. Right now, Spencer is going to demonstrate each one of this in details. Thank you. Thank you, Naveen. When a repository opts in to publish their scores, this is what helps us scale. As Naveen mentioned, we are currently running Scorecard on over a million repositories every week, but there are processing constraints and token constraints since we're hitting the get-of-api where if a repository wants their results to be part of our data set, they can install the action and publish their results. We don't want to accept just any old results because we want our data set to be valid. We don't want someone saying that they earned a perfect 11 out of 10 score. The analogy for the next few steps that I'll be talking about is how repositories can present the results and how we can verify it. During the first step, when we push the results from our GitHub action to the web app, the analogy I'll be using is presenting a conference pass. We didn't for this particular conference, but some conferences, you go up to the door, you have them scan your QR code, and it looks up a unique identifier. I think it's the conference registration in our case, and that's what the web app does first. When you publish results to our data set, there's some post endpoint that we send it to, and you can see between the two gooses what we might be sending. The badge that Scorecard is presenting is these are the results. I'll break down in the demo what results look like a little more, but in the example we're sending a score of 5.8. The branch that the analysis was done on, and for a couple Scorecard reasons, we always use the default branch, and then finally you'll notice an access token. Part of scaling, as I mentioned, is the GitHub rate limits, and GitHub tokens are a token included in GitHub action workflows that help us to do that. We are sending it over to our web app, but there's a couple things we do to make sure that we're not getting any permissions that we shouldn't be. The first is that GitHub tokens are short-lived. They're only valid while the workflow is running, and after it finishes, it doesn't provide any access. We do check before we send any token to our endpoint that it follows the format that GitHub secrets use for their workflow tokens. There are different prefixes for personal access tokens, for app tokens, and the GitHub token, for example, starts with GHS. We are taking steps to ensure that any token we use for crowdsourcing purposes, we're just using for the quota, and this is not some long-term access to the project. After we scan the QR code, we essentially want to validate that it points to like a valid conference pass. In the six-door example, when we send a score to be admitted into our data set, we are going to look it up in Recor's transparency log. Being a transparency log, it is immutable, it's append-only, so with a unique identifier, we can go back to Recor and say, give me the transparency log for this entry. I want to do some analysis on it. Instead of a QR code, a Recor transparency log entry will have either a unique identifier, a log index, or they support currently looking up by content hash, so a SHA-256 hash, which I'll talk about in the demo. It is important to note that six-door marks this search lookup as experimental, so there's no guarantees in terms of its availability. Six-door does offer SLAs for its other features, but there's no reason that the scorecard can't include the unique index when we're sending results over. So when we get a transparency log entry from Recor, we verify the inclusion proof since the transparency log is a mergel tree. It's a pretty standard inclusion proof. And then we also check the certificate. So as Navin mentioned, since we're using cosine, we get a 10-minute certificate from Pulsio. So we're just trying to make sure that when the results were signed and included into the transparency log, all the time stamps line up. So I will now jump into a demo to demonstrate some of these steps that the web app is doing. It's a little easier to follow as a command line demo instead of walking anyone through the code, no one wants to see that. But one of the things when you run scorecard repository on your repo, what you can do is show off your score. So it's a bit of gamification for best practices for repositories. The score is out of 10, so we want people to be able to show off their high scores. So when you see a badge on a readme page, and this product is saying I have a score of 9.5. Some questions that you might have is where does the score come from? Can I trust it? Has the score changed since they published it? So I'm going to be walking into some steps about how to start from a readme badge and answer some of these questions. So I'll be going through a couple commands that I'll talk through as I do it. The gist is available on GitHub. If you scan the QR code, it will take you there, or it's in the slides. So I will move over to a prerecorded demo. Just do not tempt my fate with the demo gods, but as Navin mentioned, some of the results are available through our API, or rather all of our results are available through the API, which is normally api.securityscorecards.dev. I'm hitting the staging server just because we had some PRs to change the order of some of our results around so that the content hash matches.  A little bit of information about when you ran it, which repository you ran it on, which commit it looked at. Some information about the tool itself, so which version of scorecard are you using. And then an overall score. So this is a 9.4. This has to do with scorecard's own repository. And then it breaks into one of the 19 checks that we run on repositories. I'm not going to get into all of them, but you can see, for example, binary artifacts is one thing, one best practice that we try to enforce. Saying it's usually not good to check in a binary into your repository. Hard to code review, hard to detect changes, that sort of thing. And then I'm going to take the SHA-256 sum of it as the unique identifier that I'll use when looking up the transparency log. So I'll just save it to a environment variable so that I don't have to type it in manually. And then recourse.li is a tool that recore has to interact with the transparency log from the command line. And I will search using the SHA as the unique identifier to get the transparency log entry. So the UUID for the transparency log entry that I care about is here. And again, I'll put it in a environment variable so that I don't have to type this long hex digit again. And then I'm going to use recourse.li get, which here's the usage for it. And ultimately, I'm just passing in the UUID to get the entry. And then we'll take a look at what that entry looks like. All right, so big blob of text, we see the information that we looked it up with, there's the unique ID. There's our hash, and more importantly, the signature. So the signature itself is in the content field. And the certificate that a lot of the useful OIDC information is in that public key content. So this is base 64 encoded, and to do the analysis with OpenSSS tools, I am going to extract it. So I'll just quickly send this off to JSON so that I can extract the fields that I care about. And then these next few commands are long JavaScript or JSON parsing commands, so I'm just going to copy and paste them. But essentially, I'm just saving the signature into its own file and saving the certificate into its own file. And then using OpenSSL, we can print out what the certificate looks like because we're all like human readable things. So it looks like a normal SSL certificate. We can see that the issuer is six store. This came from six store after all. There's a ten minute validity window. So this demo was recorded last Friday, and we see May 5th. It was valid for ten minutes. There's a public key in here, which we'll use to verify the signature. And then most importantly, there are some 509 extensions that contain all of the OID information that we got from when we ran this with a GitHub action. So we can see the URI and some of the features that'll break down. But this is nice human readable format. But how do we know that the signature actually matches our file? Well, I will extract the public key from the certificate so that we can double check the signature, right? So I've just extracted the public key and then I will run the digest command to verify the signature. So part of the transparency log entry was the signature and we extracted that. So here I'm just going to verify using the public key from the cert and the signature from the transparency log entry. And finally, the results that I fetched from the API. And we'll see a verified okay to signify that the signature is good. So this certificate corresponds to the results we pulled from the API. And everything checks out. But that assumes some trust in the public key. We don't really know about this public key. So I'm going to fetch the full CO route from six store. This key is also on their GitHub. There's a bunch of different ways of getting it. But I will also verify the cert came from six store. And it's important to note that I'm not going to check the time because the certificate was only good for ten minutes. So when I recorded the demo, ten minutes has passed. So just assuming everything else works about the certificate except for the time we see that the results are indeed signed by a full CO cert. Which means in summary we started at the API, which is what if you click the badge it currently goes to. We're working on a more human readable format as well. We verified the transparency log by fetching it with recourse CLI. We extracted the certificate, made sure the signature and the public key matched what we expected. And we were able to answer two of our original questions. Where did the score come from? Came from some GitHub workflow that was specified in the certificate. And has the score changed? No, because the signature matched from the result that we fetched from the API. But we still need to trust the original score. So provenance doesn't, even if we know where something came from, we still have to trust who produced it. And that's the second part of what Scorecard does. So a conference pass can be legitimate. It can get you into a conference. But that doesn't mean that you can get into every conference or talk. I, for example, had the open SSF day. So when you try to get into that on Wednesday, they checked your badge to make sure you signed up for it. And that's the analogy for the conference tickets. So just because some results were signed by Recor and came from a GitHub workflow, that's still not enough for us to say we want to use these in our data set. And for that, we're going to be looking at the certificate from the transparency log. Because it has a bunch of fields from GitHub that uniquely identify the workflow. And then we can reach out to GitHub and do our own logic. So for anyone that would want to crowdsource data, this is where the general use sigstore to get provenance and attestation part ends. And this is where the Scorecard specific logic is. Where the scores are being published by the repository they're analyzing. And that they're produced by our official GitHub action without any tampering. So again, here's a certificate that we saw during the demo. It comes from Sigstore, valid for 10 minutes. But most importantly, the 509 extensions where Sigstore puts interesting information. So we can see the URI field uniquely identifies the workflow that uploaded the score. The issuer, that URL corresponds to GitHub actions. And then a couple other pieces of information, what kind of trigger caused the workflow to run. We don't use that information. The Shah of the workflow that was used, that's one of the pieces that we will look at in the next few slides. The repository that this came from, et cetera. So all of these fields are keyed with a bunch of numbers, which I've annotated for your benefit. If you want to find out more, I've included a link at the bottom of the slide to find out all of the information that Sigstore provides from an OIDC token. So the very first thing I said is that Scorecard wants results to be self-published. And this is really just a consistency check, where when you run Scorecard action, it looks at the repository that's running it. So if you're trying to upload a score that's not in the repository that's running it, it's kind of like a consistency mismatch. So this is just a brief sanity check that we do, that the repository being analyzed is the one uploading it. So here we can see that the name and the Scorecard results matches the name from the certificate. But the more important bit is that the scores are authentic. So we don't want a repository just generating all tens and then uploading it. We want the results to come from our workflow. So here is a snippet from the certificate again shown here, and we see with the URI field, we get a specific workflow, so .github slash workflow, scorecard analysis.yaml. This is the workflow that produced it, and we have a shot. So with these two pieces of information, we have a way of uniquely identifying the workflow and then fetching it with GitHub. So we do this with the GitHub token that gets sent over. Any interaction with GitHub uses some quota. And again, this helps us scale. And then we can look at the workflow and question and do our validation. So there's two things we really look for, and that's minimal permissions and allowed job steps. Again, minimal permissions goes back to the fact that we're sending a token to ourselves. And in an effort to be good stewards, we're trying to say do not send us a token with any right permissions. We just need this for API purposes. So if you have at the top of your workflow that you're giving right permissions to the token, we don't want it. We're going to reject it. We're trying to encourage you to set up your workflow using a read-only token so that we minimize any risk in terms of sending a token over. But more importantly, we look at the steps in the workflow using similar steps with how we parse GitHub actions for scorecard analysis. We parse the same actions here to walk through the steps one by one. So the very first step we see is our official scorecard action, OSSF slash scorecard action, pinned to some SHA or TAG. And that's our action, so we're happy to see it. We'll give it a green check mark. But if there's a step next in the workflow that's called malicious scorecard action, well, we probably shouldn't trust the results from that because they could be sending any bogus JSON that they want. So I like to call that a scarecard because it's a fake scorecard. But if someone's trying to send scores with 11 or 10 or 12, that kind of stuff, we want to reject that. And then finally, there's a few additional steps that we will allow because you can do other things with the output from scorecard. You can upload it to the code scanning dashboard. You can have it as an artifact from the workflow run for you to do it later. But the important thing is that the allowed job steps are minimal. There's a list of, I think, five that you can find on the README. So sometimes people try to set up scorecard action on their repository. And they're getting failures because they're trying to do other things. So we know it can be a bit of a pain, but it helps to inspire confidence in our results. If we can take a look at the action, verify that it's doing a minimal amount of things, and if we trust every action in there, then we can trust the results that it's producing. So that's a bit of a conclusion. I'm actually going to jump back a few slides to the overall picture. We started off with a repository where the analysis happened. A user opted in to publishing those results to help us scale our data set. They want to be able to display a README badge. They want to help out generating scores and showing off their score. That result was signed with cosine, which used a ephemeral certificate from Fulcio. We're trying to make this as painless as possible, which is one reason we use the keyless signing. That certificate entry got included in Recourse Transparency Log. So that in step six, when we moved the results from the action to the web app, we were able to look up detailed information about where these results came from and then do our own analysis with the GitHub API to trust that we can trust the results. These are valid results and include them in our data set. So in conclusion, scorecard and six-door combined make for secure and trustworthy open source projects. Six-door from a provenance and attestation point of view and scorecard for a development best practices point of view. And in thinking about this crowdsourced validation, the conference ticket analogy hopefully simplifies the sort of attestation and legitimacy that we are doing with the scorecard web app. And then yeah, crowdsource results require two steps, provenance and attestation, and then validation. So for anyone else looking to do crowdsourced research on GitHub or any sort of generation, I recommend six-door as a easy mechanism to do it. The keyless signing with OADC makes it pretty easy. And then your validation steps are going to depend on your use cases, but you've got a demo of how scorecard checks its workflow contents. And it wouldn't be open source summit without saying that you can contribute. So of course PRs are welcome. We do our development on GitHub and the OSSF scorecard repository. Come make an issue, submit a PR. There's a lot of different ways that open source works. So scorecard may not detect everything of how you're doing it. We're open to making it better. Come help us do that. We are in the open SSF Slack channel under security scorecards. You can join by clicking on the link below. And then we have bi-weekly meetings every two weeks. It's on Thursdays, at least in North America. And you can find out more on the public event calendar linked at the open SSF's Getting Involved page. And then we'll open it up for questions from either Naveena or I. There should be mics by the audience. It's curious. For multi-repository projects, do you have any plans to scale scorecard maybe to the organization level for a GitHub organization? Simple question. We don't have any specific plans, but I did see. But is your question so that you can install on your organization, which in turn goes to every other repository, is that your? So. Oh, do you want a single dashboard? I'm just trying to understand what are you specifically trying to achieve? So if, say, your project was comprised of 10 repositories, in this model you'd have 10 scorecard scores, one for each of those. I guess I'm looking for an aggregate scorecard score for the entire project, which would be 10 repositories worth of code. At this moment, we don't have anything, per se. But that said, there is another open source project. We're just trying to do this specifically. And they are, in fact, trying to contribute, bring it into OpenSSF. It's in the process of doing that. But by the time if you want, you should be able to hit us up in Slack, and we should be able to point you to that. OK, thank you. I guess I'm cheating a little bit. This is really a question. It's an additional response. What challenge is that the different repos, even though it's an overall, it's all the same overall organization, the different repos within may have very different results. Some may be active, some may be not. Some may have all sorts of binaries and others things in them. So even though it may be conceptually an overall one large meta project, it's still, for a scorecard point of view, it's often, I think it's very helpful to analyze it per project, because they can be different. Any other questions? Great. OK, thank you. Yeah, we'll be around.