It's wonderful. In two years, I have been back to Australia twice, last year to Sydney, but in the middle of the semester, so once finished, I flew back. And this is in Canberra, and two years in 14, 15, right? After the previous time from Australia, in Canberra, I have been the previous time in 1987, and I left Sydney in 1988 after finish. So I just back twice, two years in a row, after almost 30 years. The topic I proposed today is not actually my current research, but it's part of it. I try to come up with a topic which is, I think, more suitable to the audience here, but at the same time, of course, has to be part of the my interest. This topic can bridge three or four issues of my interest. Intellectual foundation of modern science, as intellectual history I'm interested in, of the late 19 to early 20th century. Second one is about change. Recently, in recent years as part of the association Asian Studies job, maybe, then draw me to my interest to the changing Asian Studies and Thai Studies, Southeast Asian Studies as well. And the third, as you know, my half of my life is about politics and democratization in Thailand. Even though that half, some people say, some people assume that I can reconcile with an academic one. I won't go to details. I would say that no, nominate, leave it apart. I think the relationship between the two scholarship and my politics are a bit paradoxical. They're related, they're paradoxical in certain ways, and I think that's the best way to deal with it. So for today, I'm happy to make it clear up front that I'm not going to talk politics. Even the topic might be rich of that, but I'm not going to talk. Not because I want to avoid it. No, I can, I still keep talking about it in many places. I'm not trying to avoid anything, but just, it's just not fun. For academic, meeting like here, like in the size like this, like this. Let's have fun, rather than frustrating and having too much happiness. And so I talk about, Nugget and Nog is a Thai word for Thai educator abroad. This topic seems to be obvious, especially to many Southeast Asianists, people of South, doing Southeast Asian other countries. But somehow in Thailand, it's not that obvious. If you check how many studies are not really not in particular in Thai, in Thai in English, in Thai especially in Massachusetts, as Massachusetts, I count two. If we define it broadly, then many more, because biography of this prince, that prince, this prince, that king, then there are a lot of things about these people educated abroad. But the subject of Nugget and Nog in the center, the subject of people who study abroad and did something based on the fact that they are not great at Nog, only two. So not an obvious subject. So for me, to talk today, I divide into basically three parts. One, the implication of the active Nog or the outside, especially for intellectual history. Especially because that one I know better. And also I don't think it's applicable, the implication of the term is applicable to every aspect of social relations. But let's say many enough, I mean applicable to many aspects of the social relations, the implication of the word Nog or the outside. Then I come to the second part, I will offer a typology of Nugget and Nog. By the way, the second part, which originally was the main part of the talk, once I prepare more Nog, it's not the main part, but one of the three. But I said earlier a moment ago that it's not my research, just the idea, because roughly all three are kind of the second part, which supposedly should be the original part, the main part, is kind of sketchy. But I think I find myself, I hope, for you two interesting. But it's unlikely that I'm going to produce a big research on that, no. But you see in a moment that, wow, if you're interested, it's free. Anybody can think about it and perhaps you can produce an interesting work of this kind, not exactly this subject, but let's say I think it's applicable to many others. And the third part about the changing Thai academia and Asian studies. I attached these just because a bit part of my interest. As you see that it's a bit odd, making the whole thing not quite coherent, but let's say as a talk, I think you can connect the dots. Okay, the first part, Nog, as an outside, as a foreign, and up to a certain point, let's say by the last, for the past hundred, for about 150 years, Nog in this sense, not really Nog. Normally it doesn't, it doesn't mean that people don't think about people who study in China, in Philippines, in Burma, Bangladesh, or India. No, they think about the West. Even though the word itself doesn't imply that, but in the past 150 years, it's had that implication. Okay, Thai society and culture has been in contact with Indian and Chinese civilization for hundreds of years, as you know. To what extent those two places were the outside for entire mentality, I put this question aside. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. How much people think about Buddhism as the outside? I'm not sure because by the time I'm familiar, by the time of historical period of Thailand, they don't think about Buddhism as the outside alien culture anymore. It's the opposite. It's the opposite. You never see a Buddhist image, a face of Buddhist image that looked like Aran people, that looked like Indic people.  So they localized the face, they localized religion. So to what extent they remain Indic, I'm not sure. I put that aside. Jama had to modern Thai history in the past 200 years, particularly intellectually, 150 to 200 years, particularly to intellectual culture. It began carrying the particular reference to the West, though it's not always, not always, but you know this term, this kind of term, not always well defined. But I believe that I have the, my argument is that the effectiveness of this kind of vague term, modern, no, old time, new time, it's effective because it's vague. It's effective because it's not really well defined. Now whenever you try to define it, so particularly you find the floor, you find the holes, you find the gaps. But let's say that doesn't reduce its effectiveness by trying to argue for well defined definition. But let's say in the culture, these terms are effective because it's vague. It's applicable a bit more widely than it should be. For the non-Western foreign, there are other terms for, such as neighbors, such as bang, but it's different. But they don't use like a, a north, not really a north. This is the past. Since, since late 19th century, you find this term particularly means the West. Even though the term itself doesn't mean the West at all. The north or the outside of the West can have and suggest the two opposite connotations. One is more civilized, better, especially in terms of material culture. On the other hand, for intellectual, spiritual aspect of Thai society, it's alien. And it could be not necessary, it could be bad influence. It could be decadence. It's basically, it's something to learn but you should not imitate. So those two, those two aspects, I believe many anthropologists here should understand quickly. It doesn't mean those two stay strictly, firmly in one place. No, it's a kind of mark the two poles, mark the perimeter of people can think which north, which nine, which should be applicable, which should not. Then the trouble with intellectual history that I have grappled with for years, 20 years and grapple and also have fun with is that in fact, all the problems happen because most of the thing in human affairs happen to be in the middle. Such as Pachatipatai democracy is an in or out. You can't say the dress is in or out. You can't tell it is in or out. A lot most 90% of things are both in and out. So then the argument is forever. But that's how society evolved, right? That's how many culture evolved. Let this debate go on. I mean, both positive and negative sense because people often mark the perimeter. Even though the perimeter is also flawed, it falls the economy. But society evolved because it allowed the debate to go on in between. It allowed the debate to happen forever. Then some kinds of most of the time, the conservative interpretation one, sometimes the liberal one, but it depends. It depends. This is how Thai society, like many other society, also grapple with and struggle with what is in and out. Even though the in and out itself is both the notion that the economy is flawed. So this bifurcation, I have written about it as kind of mark of the perimeter in a book edited by Peter Jackson and Rachel Harrison. And because Aloe of the West, so that book has many more examples and many articles in there explain Aloe of the West much better than my article in that book anyway. Let us say, in and out differentiation is easily applied to make sense or to create value judgment. Even though in itself the dichotomy doesn't make much sense and mislead to the poor judgment so many times. As I say, this is how culture works. As far as I understand as a historian, this is how it works. Among the influential one in fact, in and out, it's among the influential one, it's among influential frame. I mean, we talk about conceptual frame, normally we think how to think about this theory, that theoretical argument is a kind of sophisticated thing. Don't you think in and out is a kind of simplified, simplistic conceptual term as well. And in fact, it's so influential and widespread conceptual term because it's so easily understood. Or to put it to precisely, it's so easily misunderstood. That's how it works. So there's a lot of famous dictum in Thai which play with in and out. I raised this one issue which seems politics, but I call it intellectual history. The idea about democracy in Thailand, democracy, first we saw it appear in the text. In the late 19th century, the last decade of 19th century and become a kind of written down in a text in 1903. We saw the argument that at the time there's no Thai word for democracy, they use democracy. Democracy is suitable for the society that grow wheat.  So be careful because things that grow with wheat culture doesn't fit the rice culture. Of course, the author didn't think about the rice eating people up the mountain and rice eating people in southern China in many other places. No, this is just, that's why it's false dichotomy. But it works to warn people that, hey, don't be crazy about democracy because democracy fits the wheat culture, not the rice culture. That saying has been used so many times, the latest one that I heard is after the coup last year.  Exactly, actually just the past few weeks, right? The one of the minister who says something against, I don't know against who the US or the EU thinks, saying that no, if you want to do, I mean, the thing we do is doesn't fit for people who grew up with the wheat culture. It's different. That's that's the way it's in and out. Or the general said that called democracy as democracy trap. That's the way they see in and out. Critical to the monarchy, if you're critical to the monarchy, one of the normal saying, you wouldn't believe that it's true, it's so widespread, people will say, get out of the country.  But they say, get out of the country. So meaning that you didn't have proper right attitude of the monarchy, the place for you is outside. It's outside. The place for you is outside.  So they get out of the country. That's the common saying, because the country belongs to the king. As an outsider, therefore, I think Andrew is familiar with this. Westerners cannot know Thailand better than Thais. Many Thai people who do Thai study familiar with this. Even the Australian, I'm not sure it's in the West or in the East. Wonderful place. The most wonderful place is Hawaii, because the East of Hawaii is the West. The West of Hawaii is the East. Talking about the economy, we can play a lot of fun with it. Years ago, even Thai academics are not immune for this. Years ago, when Niti, as you won't, if I hope you know, famous influential historian of the current time, in 1982, when he first produced a kind of break through academic work, not even political, academic work, the response from the conservative scholars instead of arguing against him in terms of conceptual or factual or his research quality, the argument is framed by saying that Niti relies too much on theory. We rely on sources, because for them, theory belongs to the outsider. I made a criticism to another scholar years later. I didn't do any theory at all. The argument is just plain, criticize his theories of book. In fact, the book is on post-colonialism, so I criticize the way he used theory. The criticism I got, he said, oh, don't worry because Dong Chai always just work on theory. The author said, I work on reality of Thailand. That's kind of the way to apply in and out effectively, even though it's not correctly, but effectively. Then how about Nagri and Nog? Nagri and Nog is an identity. Everybody has so many identities. I'm Sino, Thai, I am a male, I'm this, I'm that, I am Nagri and Nog too. So then when they call you Nagri and Nog doesn't mean they reduce other identities, but they emphasize or they foreground the quality that you are, the particular for qualification of a local Thai who have acquired, a local Thai who has acquired foreign elements. In other words, that's why the title for today, at least at the minimal, Nagri and Nog is seen as interlocutor of the two cultures, or more than cultures of the two here. Two here doesn't mean only West and East, West and Thai, you can say that. But I think in particular, because the way is also vague, particularly in and out. The two cultures is the in and out, the inside and the outside in the past 150 years mean the Western. But the Western can be vague, can be Scandinavian, German, British, American, or Broadway, Australia too. So at this point I'd like to make a very important note that in fact, since the mid-19th century, all notable intellectual influential notable influential intellectuals in Siam, in one way or another, they have to deal with the West. Even though so many of the majority of them were not Nagri and Nog, no. That's another point why this notion of Nagri and Nog as interlocutors, Nagri and Nog are the one who acquired foreign elements. It's not exactly true because I think so many influential, I talk about if Thai intellectuals, because that's my examples most of the time, because that's how I know, what I know better, better. Let's say the father of Thai history, Prince Dhamrung, he's brilliant. As conservative, as flawed as he is, which is normal, but he's brilliant. He's never gone abroad. He never went abroad. He was never Nagri and Nog, but he's more foreign than many local Thai. In terms of his thinking, his style of historiography, King Chulal, he never went abroad. He went abroad the entirety of his life for a tour as a king. But he wrote things that particularly, in my view, I don't have time today, mark the break or mark the moment of modernity as opposed to pre-modernity. A few important texts produced by him who was never Nagri and Nog. So many more. Intellectuals of the common origin as well. So in fact, I'd like to mark this point first. In fact, I would say that the whole scene of intellectual change in the past 150 years, one way or the other, two more or less extent, everybody have to deal with waste and inside and the Thai. Everybody were interlocutors in some ways. But in terms of identity, it's more obvious for Nagri and Nog. It's more obvious for those who went to study abroad. So to talk about those who study abroad or Nagri and Nog, it's an emphasis on their obvious visible role as a trans-culture interlocutor. So, but it shouldn't mislead us that many other people are not interlocutors. In fact, they all are. They may be different because differences, even among Nagri and Nog, there's all differences. But this identity is to mark a certain kind of identity, which in itself also misleading, which is normal for identity, everything anyway. Every kind of identity is some, to some extent is misleading. But this is to tell you about how Nog and Nog work. Among the, I give you a few more examples of interlocutors who influential as intellectuals and influential in the terms of waste versus Thai, how to deal with it. I mentioned King July, I mentioned Prince Dumrung, I mentioned a few more such as the famous name, people who know Thai history know too, Gwassara Gula, Tien Wan. Both are so farang, especially Tien Wan, a so farang. Farang is a term for westerners. Tien Wan is so farang. Gwassara Gula is not farang. If you know Sulak, I often tease that Sulak is like Gwassara Gula. It's a kind of so Thai but in fact, he's so British. Gwassara Gula is so Thai but at the same time, yeah, he's a foreigner. He's the first commoner entrepreneur writer. There's no entrepreneur writer even in the West, many, many more years after him. So he's a kind of western in that sense. Live his life by producing, publishing books, which is very farang. Well, in our recent time, people like Suh Chah Tsawak Si, a famous editor and writer, he never went abroad. But his works always introduced foreign, western artists and writers to the entire literary world. Or one of the socialist thinkers, socialist journalist, socialist writer, Suh Pasili Manon. Suh Pan is not nearly enough. Although at one point, he was a diplomat for about a decade. He was posted in USSR, in Switzerland for a while when he was in foreign services. But otherwise, he was a writer, he was an editor, he was a journalist. So ultimately, in and out are simplistic but could mislead, but it's useful because exactly because it is effective. So acquiring a degree from the West, acquiring a degree from the West is good. It's international stamp of approval of a local product. People see it positively. But once you behave to western, and in terms of intellectual history, intellectual influence, once you try to advocate something which is seen to western to say that you are nearly enough, it turned to be a criticism, a satire. So the same phrase, oh, you're nearly enough, could be admiration because you finish from Harvard. You finish from this and that, A and U, whatever. But at the same, exactly the same term, oh, you're nearly enough. It's a kind of sign, oh, a criticism that's satire, okay, you're an alien. You bring out the idea that it's not suitable here. It goes both ways. It's a kind of subtle difference. You have to work it out. That's the way it's always the word. For example, the key members of 1932 revolutionaries was called since their time, since 1932 that, oh, because they are not really enough. Hey, King, what should I would also not be enough? King Rama VII, he was outshed, he was overthrown. He was not really enough. As a matter of fact, don't you know that King Rama VII, the last thing absolute monarchy, his link with Franka was English. Yeah, in his day to day talking, he can talk both Thai and English. And English, he's more comfortable. He's writing always in English. He needs people to help writing Thai. That King Rama VII. But people never say, King Rama VII, you are not really enough. No. People say, really, people, those revolutionaries in 1932, who that overthrown absolute monarchy, they are not really enough. And in the center of South Thai, in the center of stigma, that stigma stick many more decades after that. That's a way to, at primary brand, those revolutionaries that they are the outsider, they are the bad elements that ultimately doesn't really fit the Thai environment. There are many more examples. I mentioned King Wachila Wood, even though he's so British, he's Shakespearean. Yeah, and he's quite good too. I have to admire his quite good Shakespearean. He translates Shakespeare work even though, or he imitates Shakespeare work into Thai beautifully. He also introduced the notion of char satsna, pra maha gassat. Nation, God, king, God and nation, right, into Thai become nation, religion, which means Buddhism, and the monarchy. And you know how powerful that kind of ideology is, even to recent years. That introduced by King Wachila Wood because he grew up in England. His thesis is on the Polish succession. Yeah, he wrote, his historian, he wrote, but his career turned out to be quite a good literary person, a great poet, I have to say, a failed monarch, a failed government ruler, but great literary person. So, Nuri and Nau has been notable agency of in Thai history. Criticism of their roles come in two forms. One is too extreme, and I introduce another dichotomy which is false but effective. They are too Thai. Nuri and Nau, many of them, we can see too Thai as if they never learned anything from abroad. On the other hand, there can be criticism to their too farang. They forget their roots. Among those two Thai, I have I have heard very recently, for example, sorry to break my rules, going to politics a bit. People talk about former prime minister Apisit Vithachivak. How come he is Oxford? He doesn't look like learning anything from Oxford at all. True or not, that's fine. That doesn't matter, but that's the way some many people talk about him because he looks like he doesn't appreciate democracy. He doesn't understand democracy at all. That's how people say about him. How come, I mean, it never happened if people who are not Nuri and Nau, who never brag about Oxford, no, he brag about it.  That also, but to say that you are too farang, you are kind of rooted from the Thai root. That's so common for people who are like me, like many other people who kind of maybe pro-democracy because democracy, as I said earlier, is kind of all Nau. Now, the second part of my talk, I have to go a bit faster now. Then how to make sense, although Nuri and Nau, when I got the email from Wixit, how to make sense of this. Me too, I struggle with this. Because you can find all variation between the two, between people like Michael Wright, the late Michael Wright who used to be he's a British who lived in Thailand for years. He became a great writer. He writes Thai, perfect Thai.  How to make sense of that when they got the email from Wixit. How to make sense of this, because we have so varieties. I try to urge that don't go to simply two poles or two dichotomy. Then the way to do is the following. I found a book unrelated to Thai or Southeast Asian studies at all by Todorov Yusuf. I introduced him briefly and then we move on. Todorov introduced different types of knowledge or different types of approaches to knowing the other. In this case, meaning the Spaniard who went, encountered, who encountered, went to the New World and encountered with the native people and then produced, made more, produced encyclopedia, produced all kind of records back to the back to Spain in the hundred years after, roughly speaking about hundred years after the, the conquest. In the book, you see all six names. In short, it is a comparative intellectual biography. You understand the words? I hope now you can think quickly. Yes, a comparative intellectual biography of six Spaniards. He never said these words. This is mine. But those six are the following. That's it. The whole book are about six Spaniards, what they write, what they explain, what the kind of knowledge, in fact, what the approach, their particular approach is to knowing the other. They approach the knowing from the first one, turn nativist, to the sixth one, bend the hair, kill them, because those are variations. So my argument is that in every single situation, you don't produce a single type of outcome. You produce many. On the other hand, it doesn't mean that those many are too much to study. Yes, you can study. If you take the right approach, you apply good methodology, you can study. Or unless they're talking about simple, especially for parents, people who have kids. I have two kids. Two kids brought up in the same way. I never think, okay, they have to take a different approach as a male or female. Just a simple approach. They're so different. This is common experience of every parent. Many kids are not the same, even though we brought them up in the same way, we thought that, at least. The same thing. Every single situation doesn't produce one. But on the other hand, don't feel this better. It's so chaotic. And so I'm systematic that we cannot understand it. At least, we cannot understand it conceptually. No, it's not true. We can. My argument is that we can. My suggestion is that in this way, in a way, type is not a real person. Type are always conceptual tools. Even though those six people in total argument is real people. But in fact, all six at the same time are real individuals at the same time are representative of type. In other words, to make it more simpler. Simplify the complexity.   Complexify your simple argument. Don't simplify it. Don't make it too simplistic. Here, my argument is that simplify the complexity. Bring it down into types. But don't be trapped by types. Don't be trapped by your own typology. No. Use typology as a tool to understand the vast variation. You can stick particular people to somewhere between three and four, or exactly three, exactly five, somewhere between one and two. Then you have, you can make sense better. I don't promise that there are only six. There could be four. There could be eight. I don't know. But think about it. In this way, you can have categories of the insider as well. Of course, it depends on what criteria. In this case, you can see, just take a quick look. You can see, uh-oh, I have two criteria in mind at the same time. One is political criteria. From pro-establishment to a radical rabble rouser, or to collapse. This one doesn't fit political because collaborator can be go everywhere. But I have the second kind of, not neat, but let's say I put in one screen, a kind of, let's say you can have a, I think have it. No, I don't have. Okay. On one hand is a spectrum between pro-establishment, apologies, whatever, to the kind of collaborator. On the other hand, second criteria, you can form xenophobia to xenophilia. People who hate the West. People who love the West. That kind of range. Nobody fit exactly the types, but this is how to make sense of the differences. This is, this is a part that I say, if people interested, take this idea, develop it in much better way. I would be glad because I'd like to understand those complexity of the nuances of, I mean, in my graduate, I told many people if this is repetition, as I'm sorry, my graduate seminar, I always forbid a certain word. You cannot use the word because we use it too often. The first word is complexity. You have to spare it out. You can't say complexity, hide behind the complexity. Just spare it out. What is that complexity? The second is nuance. You cannot hide behind the word nuance. You have to spare it out. What is the nuance? Which not only students, I myself, find trouble many times because it's hard to, to spare it out. So how about nuclear now? I give you a number of examples. Even Thai, you may not be familiar with this name. Don't worry, especially people who don't know Thai, who don't do Thai study, may not, you don't know this for sure. But let's say I just give you a glance example and go quickly. You can see the range of possible types. In here I put names on. I put the first on. Even though they are types, even a single person doesn't fit a particular type. But let's say that prominent characteristic he or she is, then I can, I can, and you can see this is not a good example. All males, for example. So not good, but let's say just a quick look. With Sotisatian, it's not a famous name. He's a famous writer in the 40s, 50s. He saw Pharang more than Pharang. He wore hat suit in Bangkok. And cozy girls and had to and walk like a guest where he studied Philippines. Yeah, he's from the Philippines. That's why he comes so American. People like Tansenir, our contemporary, you can tell him, but let's say he would be stared me. Tansenir doesn't know how to joke. Tansenir, he writes Thai. You don't understand his Thai unless you translate into English. But yet, he's a champion of local wisdom. And don't tell him that. No, he never understand the local people. No, he would deny it. He would refuse it, but that's how not just me, many people see him that way. A typical technocrat, a lot of them, most of them never know. Economist, planner, those who can name them. Then you have a typical technocrat, light boy, who is technocrat. Yes, who was technocrat. But I'm typically in the sense that the emphasis he brought in up to certain point is technocrat. He's a banker. He's an economist. But up to center, he became kind advocate for liberal democracy. Too politicized in a way. That's why he got into trouble at the end of his life. Radical conservative, you know, Sulak, this one you might know more. How about brilliant, but not radical? All of this, I don't really know. For example, this name you might not know. He's an ideologue. He's a regent one time in 1940. I don't remember. And I mix up Buddhist era and common era, Sulak. Let's say in the late 40s or early 50s, he's a regent. When the king was so young, Rama VIII died. The king was so young. He was a regent. He's a great scholar, great scholar. In one of his short articles was So Influential, which I see that piece as a foundation, ideological foundation, ideological basis of the building of the current monarch. He wrote it. That piece started with Malinovsky. Yeah, that piece started with Malinovsky. The importance of magic, importance of sacredness. Then move on to King Rangkampag inscription. Yep, Malinovsky side by side with Rangkampag inscription to lay the groundwork for inter-eurology, how the modern monarchy should be built on. Or people like Kripp Pramod, popularizer of modern monarchy, not exactly student of this one, but let's say along the same line of thinking, but he's more popularizer. He's a writer, journalist, and later prime minister. King Vajra would be mentioned already, and you can see a piece, a person, an Oxford graduate who never left Thailand, as you put in court. Not a statement of fact. No, not a fact. It's just a way through Disney. You see the range of this. They also represent certain types. How do I name, how should I name different types? I don't know. I haven't gone that far. I leave it up to you to think about it.  This part can be cut off, and I finish here, but I just love to add it on, so I just do it, indulge myself, adding it on. The point is that Nugri-Nog is as a category, Nugri-Nog as a category have been, let's say, have a role about late 19th century, up to about, let's say, 1960s as an identity. People call Nugri-Nog as an identity. Lately, maybe your generation, people don't call that anymore. Why? Because so many people are Nugri-Nog. It doesn't have distinctive value anymore. By 70, 80s, people type you went abroad a lot and came back in so many professions, so it lost its distinctive value, not because they disappeared. No, because it became common. Nugri-Nog in earlier period, their role or their place is not in intellectual, it's not in academia. No, it's in the bureaucracy, because Thai academia, in fact, started to expand among the first professional, full-time, academic person, was high, were high in the second half of 1960s. If you call academia as a kind of community of that kind of professional people, it's very young. But of course, if you call Thai society, including people in the bureaucracy, people who are interested in intellectual work, even though no matter profession they are, yes, of course, academia has been much longer than that. But the academia, in the way we talk about, in Thailand just about the 60s, at the time when the distinctive value of Nugri-Nog started to dilute, doesn't mean that Nugri-Nog played no role or Nugri-Nog doesn't do anything anymore. No. But people don't call that because you are not Nugri-Nog, so you have influence in such and such ways, because everybody is Nugri-Nog. Let's say most people are Nugri-Nog, so they don't call it distinctively. But let's say, the reason I put this part in, because the role, at least for mainly Nugri-Nog, many who are educated abroad from now, at least this sector, you go back to academia. Even though I put the first, I put, I just said the moment ago, in fact, so, materially, no, no, they never get to the academia. No, they go to other profession and no distinctive value anymore. So this part, to be fair, I'm not talking about the whole Nugri-Nog, just talking about people like you, many Thais here in particular. The point here is that Thai studies, Thai academia is changing in Thailand. They're changing. There are so many ways we can talk about that change. Just for example, one way that I like, I don't want to talk, but it's a huge subject. It's a huge issue. I have no time and have no knowledge enough. Just talking about the changing, the scale, the size of the academia, the number of university, the number of students, number of professors in the past 20 years. I don't know, two, four, three, four, or quadruple. I'm not sure. So fast. Just scale alone means a lot, change a lot of Thai academia. But it's too hard to grapple with. It's too hard to deal with it. So that's why I just mentioned in passing. Another thing, another role, which is not exclusive to Nugri-Nog, but let's say it's a distinctive role to Thai intellectuals, like many other intellectuals in Southeast Asia, at least according to Harry Bender since 1961. Intellectuals in Southeast Asia, active one and smart one, usually they are also public intellectuals. Unlike in the West, no. The smart one tend to be in your own home, in your own place. In Thai, the smarter one go public. In Indonesia too, I believe. In Philippines too. Not everybody, but let's say it's common. It's so common. This is also another aspect that I like to talk and I mark it here, cut. Because it's so important, but I don't have time. But it's not particularly, but Nugri-Nog anyway. The part that I like to emphasize as the last part here is that Thai studies are lacking behind, are having trouble. This is my view. I presented this the last year, Thai study confirmed exactly this point. Because the lack of engagement with scholarship of the outside. Thanks to the following barrier, maybe not these three, but I can explain these three quickly in short, language barrier. When Singapore wants to turn from teaching university from research institution, they do a number of things, but the key one of the key one of a few, not that many, there's so many things they change quickly, fast, radically. But a few things worth important, a key thing. One is reduce the teaching law. How they can reduce the teaching law from five or six down to three. Singapore NUS now is three among liberal arts. They just, they have money first. Not many countries have money. Singapore have money. Second, they do it in English. The teaching done in English. If the Thai have money, they can, they want to suddenly change the teaching law. Can they do that? No. Because they're not mean enough Thai to fill up the positions. Worth, or let's say the university would be like, like now people complain a lot about the quality of the, of the faculty already among the so many places that expanded with expansion. So it's not as easy because language barrier. But more important than that, there have been so many Thai, it's so common for Thai scholars, including in social science humanities, especially in the humanities. Historian, literature people, they can live their life after coming back from abroad. They can live their whole career in Thai. They don't have to have, they don't have to publish in English. Now maybe change. But let's say up to recently. They don't have to publish in English. They don't have to read or follow the journals in English. Many journals are not available anywhere. Library, short of budget, library kind of thing. So a lot of people, I would say typical Thai scholars in Thailand, in humanities, they don't read English regularly. So many of them don't read at all. Or read it kind of very sketchy. They don't follow the literature. You can see the period of that refuse or deny or failure to follow the literature in your field. That happened because language barrier is so common. The solution of Thai administrators by forcing young people like your generation, now you have to publish in English in ranked journal. I'm not sure that's so big. But let's say that's one effort. I think it's misplaced. I think it does something bad. But let's say this is not the place to go to that detail. It's one condition. Second economy here is not national economy. It's economy of scholarship. Meaning demand supply of your knowledge. Demand of your knowledge, most of the time, not the demand in English. Not the demand in, even not in terms of language. In some ways that you need to acquire the engagement, you need to engage with the scholarship outside. If you are fine, you are said you can be self-sufficient in terms of, you can have sufficiency knowledge. And then you can operate in the country. And of course, ideology. This kind of knowledge is so alien. So it's out. So those are three barriers result in what I call intellectual protectionism. Whenever you get to intellectual protectionism, the quality tends to go down. In Thai intellectual, Thai scholarship as well. This is the first thing I want to do about Thai studies. Then Thai studies become provincialized. The last point of today, sorry if I go a bit over time. Thai studies, that's what's going on. There may be efforts to try to change. They may be successful. They may be misplaced. How can I measure that beyond my talk here? Let's say, put that aside. But that condition is happening at the time when ancient studies is changing rapidly and actively in two ways. The second part is my presidential address that was published in JAS already in November issue. The first part I add on it because in fact, my mistake, I missed that. Presidential address, I should add this, but that's fine. The first thing also going on a longer, why maybe longer than this issue. My argument first is that it's here in a new environment. Let's put this way to make it brief. Every studies have, we know it, now dominant, influential by the American. Not entirely American, but influential by the American. It's built up based on the need of the Cold War. Don't translate too directly that so the work of scholars have to serve the American government. No, things doesn't happen that so simplistically. No, never. In fact, most of scholars or good scholars were critical to the government. But yet, the frame, the way, the funding given to you is framed in terms of different areas of studies as we know it now. That frame is collapsing partly the end of the Cold War, partly the emerging globalized economy, which I think I don't need to tell you. I don't need to describe because I can't. I'm not, I don't have expertise in that way. Both are linked. The end of Cold War, the globalized economy, both are linked in certain ways. Area studies was affected. Ancient studies were affected. At least in terms of, hey, why do we have to define it as North East, as South East, as South, as China, blah, blah, so on and so forth? Why in particular, Southeast Asian studies, we tend to be focused on nation state? By now, you realize that you have read so much work since the 80s, I would say, quite a while ago, since the 80s. Since the 80s, people try to, scholars try to transcend that kind of limit, that kind of definition. Conscious or not conscious with a big picture of the changing space, that's fine. But let's say, there's things going on. Now, among the facts, among the fashionable thing is more like transnational Asia or to make it short, trans-Asia, inter-Asia, inter-Asia, what else? And defining region in so many different ways. You might see it as intellectual fun. Yeah, it's a kind of intellectual exercise for fun, but it also has impact, it also has effect. Because suddenly, we're starting to know, you have the knowledge that Asia or different shape, different forms of Asia is possible to know. It's possible to know. It used to be the knowledge that fall into the crack because it doesn't fit the region. But now it becomes the knowledge in full bloom. Suddenly, we realize that there's so many ways of defining Asia, especially. And by those, just simply, basically, not simply, just basically by defining the space of Asia differently, you found different knowledge. I saw Ariel, I suddenly think, yeah, Ariel has done this a lot. You define cultural studies, popular culture. It doesn't fit the region that you try to fit it, even though it produces certain languages. In fact, it doesn't fit the region that we try to fit it. It costs. It less is more. Whatever, it doesn't exactly fit the region we want. We seem to know this for a long while, even before the 80s, but we didn't do it. We didn't produce the knowledge actively in the real way until maybe since the 80s, people like Tony Reed, many other people, or the famous one beyond Southeast Asia, like Ken Palmer Arms, like Sanchez Subramanyam, those people, those work, those kind of work are important. And I say it almost sarcastically as fashionable. It does not fair to them. I have to say that I love those works. It's so important. I'm not capable of doing it, but let's say it's important. It's coming like it or not. Asia is changing. Do people in Thai studies aware of this? Do they want to engage in what way they can and shouldn't get? I am happy or unfortunately, I'm unhappy to report that I don't think this has become an agenda inside Thai academia yet. It has been for Thai people outside. Yes, Andrew, Peter, I can solve the first. We know of this, but it hasn't been an issue much in Thailand. Things have changed. My last, last of the last point, the side of production of Asian studies is also changing, meaning, meaning the following. One of the privilege of being president is going around the countries to see people do Asian studies in the region. Many of them never show up in the annual meeting because they always fail to get their proposal accepted. Or so many of them are graduate students, a few places including undergrad. The privilege gave me the knowledge that I confirm my speculation but confirm even though there is no statistic. The number of faculty of scholars in Asian studies, I mean who teach courses and do research on Asian studies in the US right now, rapidly, rapidly change democracy. There are Asians, there are Asians. Think about Edward Said when he talked about Orientalism as the study of the other. Do you think those people study Asia as the other? Maybe not their insider. Maybe they were denied. Maybe many of them are like me. Maybe they are in between people like me. But let's say definitely I never studied Thailand and like the other. It may be the other of me in certain way. But they're not the other in the sense of the West versus the East like Said suggests. Areas studied for those people who become, I won't say majority, they're not yet. But let's say the number increased fast in the past, I don't know how many years, but not beyond 20 years. So many faces like me teaching courses in Asian studies, everywhere in the US. Students too. Many Chinese students take courses in Chinese history. Not that they know well, some they don't know well, some thought they know well. And they have effect from the fact that they know better to the fact that in fact they don't know much. Yeah, I have a good example I put in my article in the JAS. One of my colleagues have trouble, have so many Chinese, then they accuse the professor who is American that, uh-oh, his Chinese history is so different from Chinese history that they know. You can imagine what kind of Chinese history they know. And they accuse the professor of no, you don't know enough. The way my friend have to adjust. Have to tackle this issue, of course. Have to deal with it. You can't deny it because in that class, the majority happen to be Chinese. So this kind of news, this kind of information, not rumors, happening fast, increasingly. On the other hand, this December, the first conference of Southeast Asian studies by consortium of Southeast Asian studies, right? Southeast Asian studies everywhere pop up fast in Southeast Asia. They may try, even let's say Singapore, they may want to be Cornell, they may want to be Harvard, whatever. But in the end, consciously or not consciously, they will find that they have to find their own identity. That will take time, but that will happen. Asian studies produced in Asia would eventually, I don't know how long, have their own characteristics. I don't mean it's good. I don't mean it's bad. I really don't know. For example, if it happens today, right now, it will become policy-oriented and market-serving. A lot of them, I don't like that, of course. But let's say, don't you think colonial Asian studies or American Asian studies started the same way? Yeah. Starting by trying, making a lot of mistakes. Asian studies overall are moving towards Asia. I'm not saying that America is going over. No, when people say, so America is over, right? I ask them, do you think British education, British university have gone bad? You don't go to Britain anymore? Not true, right? So it's not that easy. But suffice to say that Asian studies in Asia, especially in China, in China is becoming forceful. Like it or not, that's happening. Then last, last, last point.  What kind of Thai academia do you want to produce? Do you want to share in 10, 20 years from now in the environment of Thai studies, as I told you, in the environment of Asian studies, as I just told you, I'm not sure that I'm 100 percent. I'm sure I'm not 100 percent correct. But this is just a broad trend. Think about it. How long, how long? You can avoid or you can let the situation that inadequate engagement with the outside world, outside scholarship going on, if you can't, what to do? At the institutional level and down to your own individual level, how would you do the engagement? Then back to the original issue, I start this talk. To what extent or in what way, what type of knowledge do you want to be, among those five or six? Or let's say if you happen to be, you didn't try to, you don't have a kind of design, but do eventually happen to be certain ways, make sure you're aware of who you are, what approach you take. In the end, what kind of knowledge do you want to be or introduce to Thai academia? Sorry, it'll be too long. Thank you.


Jordan now 10 consecutive outings for Yankee's pitchers going six innings or more How much fun is it to be part of this rotation right now where you feed off each other? It's fun. Everybody's going out there and throwing strikes, and kind of just keep competing and keeping us in the game, so We're just trying to keep building off of each other, I guess.  How did you feel about the way your stuff worked? Felt good. Really maybe two pitches I went back, but overall stuff was moving how I wanted it to and do a lot of strikes. How important was the change up for you? I think you got eight swings and misses on that pitch. How valuable a weapon was that for you? Oh, it's nice. Sometimes I've just got to pick when to throw it when hitters are starting to know it's my my best pitch and trying to just sit it so kind of just got to read swings and kind of pay a little more attention. I've got enough of a serious sweep for you guys. Yeah. Yeah, we're playing good baseball, so we're just going to try and stay where we are. Jordan, what was it like having your first pitch at a moment where you just didn't know? It was fine. Tried to get to bed as early as I can could last night, but of course sleep schedule that I'm on right now was impossible. But woke up and did everything I could to be awake and made sure the body was loose and just competed the best I could. How much does the change your routine? You know, especially on the day that you're starting like that or does it change it at all? I'm a professional enough to kind of move everything up like I need and sat. I did a little extra today to make sure I was loose. For you guys, how good is it to see off as Gallo getting that pitch and Ron and Donaldson coming back and playing that game? Those two guys, I mean kids. Um Good to see yes. I mean, it's good to see them. They're they're really good players. So If there's something it's it's going to change eventually


Top 10 African Cities with the Fastest Growing Millionaire Population Hello there and welcome. In today's video, I will be taking you across Africa to show you the cities with the fastest growing millionaire population. Have you ever wondered which country in Africa has the highest number of millionaires? Or have you ever wondered which cities have the richest people in Africa? Well, after a careful study and research, I've gone across the continent to get this question answered for you. The local economy and community can be significantly impacted by the presence of wealthy people in a city. Although some may see them as a representation of inequality, their investments and contributions can open doors for expansion and improvement. When talking about wealth in the world, just few Africans are mentioned, but there are many cities in Africa that are much richer or have more billionaires that some cities in Europe, Asia, and America. Hello there, you are watching Africa Reloaded and I am James your host. Please take a few seconds to like this video as we begin the ride. 10. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia The nation's commercial and cultural center is Addis Ababa, Ethiopia's enormous metropolis located in the hills bordering the Great Rift Valley. There are many economic prospects in this country's largest and most developed city, which has led to an increase in the number of billionaires. The predicted population of the city in 2021 was 3,774,000 people. Addis Ababa saw a 23% growth in the number of wealthy people between 2012 and 2022, ranking it as the 10th city in Africa with the most billionaires. This city has easy access to numerous basic social services, including water, roads, and medical facilities. 9. Accra, Ghana Ghana's capital, Accra, is located on West Africa's Atlantic coast. One of the most thriving and economically advanced cities in West Africa, it also has one of the largest markets. After Lagos, Nigeria, Accra is the second largest trading and commercial hub in West Africa. Ghana's administrative, financial, and educational hub is Accra. The city is home to the headquarters of all the major banks and trading companies, as well as the Accra Central Library, the Electricity Corporation, the General Post Office, the insurance companies, and the Electricity Corporation. Many billionaires have emerged in the city as a result of this. 8. Swakopmund, Namibia A coastal city in western Namibia, Swakopmund lies 352 kilometers, 219 miles west of Windhoek, the country's capital. The resort and housing industries are the key businesses that are thriving in Namibia's largest seaside town, which is one of the reasons it attracts so many tourists and revelers from around the world and has a significant number of billionaires. The main sources of income for billionaires in this city include finance, insurance, manufacturing, tourism, agriculture, and transportation. 7. Whale Coast, South Africa The Cape Whale Coast is located just outside of Cape Town, close to the southernmost point of Africa. This area is aptly referred to as Heaven on Earth. A section of the Western Cape in South Africa is known as the Cape Whale Coast, one of the best sites in the world to see whales is along this stunning coastline. From Royals in the west to Coyne Point in the east, the path runs. The city has the seventh highest concentration of billionaires in Africa. This city had a 25% growth in the total number of billionaires between 2012 and 2022. This is a wealthy area with a serene and tranquil atmosphere. 6. Casablanca, Morocco In western Morocco, Casablanca is a port city and a major commercial center that faces the Atlantic Ocean. Additionally, it is the economic and commercial center of North Africa and the biggest city in Morocco. The majority of Morocco's foreign trade is conducted through the artificial port of Casablanca, which is fortified against the sea by breakwater. Additionally, it serves as a port of call for ships from Europe. Boulevard Hansali, which leads to the port, is lined with tourist-oriented stores. The old city, or Medina, the first Arab town, is located inland from the ports and the harbor. This city has had the opportunity to produce several billionaires because to its bustling port. Between 2012 and 2022, the number of billionaires in this city increased by 28%. 5. Nairobi, Kenya Kenya's capital city is Nairobi. In addition to its metropolitan core, the city features Nairobi National Park, a sizeable gain reserve that is home to giraffes, zebras, and lions in addition to reproducing endangered black rhinos. In Nairobi, the industries with the highest profits are tourism, lodging, and real estate. The country's main industrial hub is Nairobi. The largest single industrial employer is the railroad industry. Beverages, cigarettes, and processed foods are produced by light manufacturing industries. Due to the city's proximity to the agricultural heartland of eastern Africa and the fact that many primary goods pass through Nairobi before being shipped via Mambasa, there are many billionaires living there. 4. Tangier, Morocco Since the time of the Phoenicians, Tangier, a Moroccan port on the straight of Gibraltar, has served as a vital crossing point between Africa and Europe. The Dar el-Maxin, a palace of the sultans that is now a museum displaying Moroccan antiques, is located on the Medina's whitewashed hillside. After Casablanca, Tangier is the second major industrial hub in Morocco. Textile, chemical, mechanical, metallurgy, and naval building are Tangier's primary businesses. Due to its eminent and abundant commercial opportunities, this city ranks fourth among African cities with a high number of millionaires. 3. Mambasa, Kenya Mambasa is a coastal settlement on the Indian Ocean in southeast Kenya. Before Nairobi was given the status of capital city in 1907, it served as the first capital of British East Africa. There are two ports in Mambasa. Mambasa-old port on the east side of the island and Kilindini harbor on the west. Cezul, cotton, sugar, kpop, coconuts, fruits, and vegetables are among the agricultural products that are sold in Mambasa. The port city also exports many of these items, as well as those from northeastern Tanzania and Uganda, with which it has rail connections. Its economy is driven by industries including shipbuilding and repair, metal and cement manufacturing, sugar processing, a fertilizer plant, and an oil refinery at Changi, which has produced numerous billionaires in Mambasa. 2. Marrakesh, Morocco The fourth largest city in the kingdom of Morocco is Marrakesh, also known as Marrakesh. Mosques, palaces, and gardens may be found in Marrakesh, an ancient imperial city in western Morocco. It is now a significant business hub. The Medina is a medieval city with walls that was once part of the Berber empire, particularly the Menera olive grove and the walled 405 hectare. Actile gardens are two of Marrakesh's well-known parks. Gardens in the city are still watered by an irrigation system that was constructed under the Almoravids. The city, which is well known for tourism and winter sports, houses an international airport, and serves as a commercial hub for commerce between the Sahara and the high Atlas Mountains. 1. Kigali, Rwanda The capital and largest city of Rwanda is Kigali. It is situated in a region of rolling hills, with several valleys on the Ruganmo River, close to the country's geographic center. The majority of industrial activity involves the processing of coffee, tea, and other agricultural goods, with the exception of small-scale mining operations, and a small number of consumer industries, such as textiles, cement, paint, pharmaceuticals, soap, matches, furniture, beverages, and food products. Kigali is where the majority of Rwanda's major industries are situated. One of the cleanest cities in Africa is also Kigali. Kigali became the African city, with the highest concentration of billionaires between 2012 and 2022, thanks to a 72% growth in the number of billionaires. Being the nation with the most billionaires does not imply that its citizens are the wealthiest people in Africa. The wealthiest people in Africa are still dispersed throughout certain nations, like Nigeria. We appreciate your commitment to finishing the video. Please share your opinions with us in the comment area. Don't forget to subscribe, like, and share Africa Reloaded. Please click and turn on the notification bell to receive notifications when we upload new videos.


I want to share with you out of Luke chapter 10 verses 38 through 42. I chose to entitle this particular message, laboring or listening. And it's a story we're all familiar with. It's found here in the Gospel of Luke chapter 10 verses 38 through 42. So I'll begin reading at verse 38. I'll read 2 verse 42 and we'll get into our study. Luke writes, now it happened as they went that he entered a certain village and a certain woman named Martha welcomed him into her house. She had a sister called Mary who also sat at Jesus' feet and heard his word. But Martha was distracted with much serving and she approached him and said, Lord, do you not care that my sister has left me to serve alone? Therefore tell her to help me. And Jesus answered and said to her, Martha, Martha, you are worried and troubled about many things. But one thing is needed and Mary has chosen that good part, which will not be taken away from her. Now, as I was preparing this, I began to think about how many passages there are so many that have Jesus seated at a meal and join a meal with somebody. And in the Gospel of Luke, for example, Luke on various occasions makes mention of the fact that Jesus would go often and have meals. In chapter five, for example, of Luke verses 29 through 32, we have an example of Jesus at a man by the name of Matthew Levi's house. And that's the time that the people began to grumble within themselves because Jesus was eating with sinners and all.  And he said, I haven't come to call the well, but the sick to salvation. You know, he took opportunity to not only have a meal, but he took the opportunity to minister to people. We see it in Luke 7, 36 through 50 at Simon, the Pharisees house, where Jesus gives to him a lesson concerning grace and forgiveness. We see it in Luke 14, where Jesus on the Sabbath healed a man who had dropsy and the people were there watching him to see what he would do on the Sabbath. And then he taught him about the mercy and grace of God. We see it in Luke 19, verses one through 10, when he's at Zacchaeus's house and he was accused of being at the house as a guest of a sinner. He did this often. As a matter of fact, he ate so often, there was a charge that was formed against him for doing so. In Luke 7, 34, he had said, the sinner man has come eating and drinking. You say, look, a glutton and a wine bibber, a friend of tax collectors and sinners. And so Jesus would eat very often at people's houses. And when he went to dinner, he would use the opportunity to reach the people. And he didn't seem to mind whom he ate with. And I'm sure, and some of us really don't think about it this way, but I'm sure that it wasn't always polite conversation at the table. I think that sometimes I have, perhaps you have too.  And I'm convinced that's not true at all, because that wouldn't be real. That wouldn't be a real thing. Marie and I, the other day, just this last week, went to eat breakfast. And as we were eating breakfast, they seated us in a certain place and we sat down and right next to me was two young men and they were talking loudly and one kid kept pulling out his music and playing it and get this loud music and all. And it's just an entirely different experience than when we grew up because as we grew up, obviously, when you went out to dinner, it was because you wanted to get out of the noise of your house. So you'd go to a restaurant and it would be quiet. There'd be polite conversation around the table. We were all aware of the fact that there were people around us, but today they want you to join in the conversation. So they're loud and they make noise and they play their music and that's what was going on. And this one kid began to use a lot of profanity and we're sitting within four feet of them. And he's just using this language and I turned to Marie and I said, I'm pretty sure he doesn't have a dad. I'm pretty sure. I'm pretty sure he never learned to be polite in public and he thinks this is normal. And as I was there, I turned and I looked at him because he was using some pretty bad words. And I looked at him and I was going to say, son, could you kind of quiet it down a bit? We've got a lady at the table, but he didn't look at me. He got quiet because he could see that. He was right there. He could see it. I had my fork out. Now he could see it. And then the Lord just spoke to my heart and I was talking to Marie and I started saying, you know, as I just was thinking about when Jesus would go and have a meal, I'm pretty sure that there would have been people exactly like what we're experiencing right now. Exactly like that. Seated next to him, using language that they wanted to use, being rude. And the Lord spoke to my heart and he said, you've gotten old. I said, what? I can't hear you.  Be careful how you feel. Be careful what it would irritate you. Look for an opportunity rather than getting offended. You know what I'm saying? Perhaps some of us might need to hear that too. Be careful. It's not that I wouldn't correct. I will if necessary, but I don't expect anything either. I don't expect them to say, oh, great, sir, forgive me. I don't expect that. But at the same time, sometimes you feel the agitation and say, you know, son, this is a restaurant. This isn't where you should be. You want to correct. You do, I do. And then the Lord said, you need to remember that Jesus would go into various places and I'm sure it wasn't polite. But he always found a place of opportunity to share about grace and love, even though they could be greatly offensive. And so I was thinking about that after that meal and I added that to my notes to remember even as we go through this, because Christ Jesus is on a meal. He's at a meal at a woman's house. And we want to look at that today because the title of this message is mentioned is laboring or listening. Because I believe that we as Christians have to realize that it's best to listen before you labor. And Martha made the mistake of laboring without first listening. That's what we're looking at here in this passage. Let me give you its context. Let me develop a foundation. I'm moving to some application and we'll look at this passage together today. Again, in verse 38, it happened as they went that he entered a certain village, a certain woman in Martha, welcomed him into her house. So Jesus and his disciples are near the city of Jerusalem, if you were looking at a map and they're entering into a village. The village is called Bethany. We know that the village is named Bethany because John in chapter 11 tells us that that's where Martha lived. She lived in the city of Bethany. It's a small village two miles northeast of the city of Jerusalem. And it says here in verse 38, he entered into a certain village, Jesus Bethany, and a certain woman named Martha welcomed him into her house. And so we're introduced to a woman by the name of Martha, but I also want to point out that she welcomed Jesus into her house. So this is one of Jesus' disciples. Her name is Martha. This isn't the only place that you see Martha. We encounter her twice in the gospel of John. You see her in chapter 11 and you see her in chapter 12. What's interesting in verse one is that Luke tells us that Martha welcomed Jesus into her house and by referring to it as her house, he's giving us some insight. One is she may very well be a widow because she owned the home. And also by the way she acts, she reveals to us that she's the older sister. It says in verse 39, she had a sister called Mary who also sat at Jesus' feet and heard his word. And so she had a sister named Mary who would have been her younger sister. This is Mary. Again in John chapter 11, verse two, Mary is mentioned as well as the brother named Lazarus. But notice here in verse 39 how Luke makes it clear that Mary sat at Jesus' feet and heard his word. She sat at Jesus' feet and heard his word. This is a way for Luke to tell us that Mary was a believer. She was seated at his feet because during that day sitting at the feet was a picture of someone being someone else's disciple. So they would use that phrase they sat at the feet of in reference to the fact that they were a disciple of the person who was teaching. In Acts 22, verse 31, the apostle Paul spoke about that. He said, I am indeed a Jew born in Tarsus, Ecclesia but brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel taught according to the strictness of our father's law. When he said seated at the feet of Gamaliel, he was saying I was one of his disciples. He mentored me. So Mary sat quietly at his feet. Sitting at his feet revealed that she was ready to receive his word. And it also revealed that she would be submitted to what the word had to say. Some people will sit at the feet, if you will, listening but not all people sit at the feet listening with a willing obedience. There are a lot of people as we know who will hear a Bible study who have already made up their mind they're not gonna do anything that bothers them. She was in that way. She sat at the feet not only listening but with a heart that was willingly obedient. She sat quietly at his feet attending to his teaching for he embraced every opportunity of imparting the knowledge of divine things to such as were willing to receive it. And so Jesus came to do his father's will and he was always busy about his father's business. And she would sit there to listen to the one who was of that nature. We see in the scriptures that Jesus rose up early in the morning to pray and he would spend the rest of the day teaching and ministering. And whenever he had opportunity, he would give people the word of God. We can think that genuine Bible teaching occurs only in a church building but that's obviously not true. Jesus often ministered and taught in homes. And you see it again in scripture in Mark 1, 29. As soon as they had come out of the synagogue they entered the house of Simon and Andrew with James and John. And this is where Jesus healed Simon's mother-in-law. In Mark chapter two, verse one, it speaks of Jesus ministering in a home when he healed a paralytic. In Matthew nine, verse 10, it speaks of Jesus ministering in Matthew's home. So there was a lot of ministry that would take place in homes. This is an example of it but you see it throughout the scriptures. The early church didn't always meet in buildings. They often met in homes. As a matter of fact, meeting in a home was an early practice of the church. In Acts 20, verse 20, Paul said, I kept back nothing that was helpful but proclaimed it to you and taught you publicly and from house to house. In Romans 16, verse five, greet the church that is in Priscilla and Aquila's house. Colossians 415, greet the brethren who are in Laodicea and Nymphus and the church that is in his house. And Philemon II speaks of the church that was in his home. There were times in the early church, didn't have buildings. The church would meet in homes and it doesn't have to be that you're in a church to be taught the things of God. I taught in homes for years. My first Bible study I ever taught back in 1973 was in a house. Then the second study that I began to do was also in a house in Norwalk and then there was another study that I did in the city of Ontario and I taught a home study in Montclair. I've taught in a lot of homes. This church began in a home study in Pomona and our first church building was a house. And so you can meet in a house, you can teach the word of God in a home. Today, even this day, there are studies and fellowships that occur in homes from our church. Many lessons are not learned in church buildings, they're learned in homes. Not only in home, adult Bible studies and in home family devotions and the place that Christian maturity develops best is in the home. It's in the word and so the word of God belongs in a home and Jesus is there in a house. Home Bible studies continue that tradition. The church began and used homes and that's how it works because many lessons are not learned in church buildings, they're learned in the home. That's why I encourage any parents in here to make sure you impart to your kids the word of God in your home. Don't teach them that there's certain behaviors that occur in a church building and certain behaviors that occur in a house. What you learn in the home, you live everywhere, right? So we need to see that in this particular case. We see Jesus is going to meal, but in a meal he's teaching. You've got Mary who's seated at his feet listening. Well, Martha is in the kitchen, if you will, preparing a meal. But that's what would take place all the time. Whenever Jesus was asked, would you come over? He would do a work. Very often he would give a teaching. Sometimes he would be such a blessing to one person and offend somebody else, but that's what he did. And that's what we're seeing here right now. He taught everywhere, not just in a temple, not just in synagogues. Jesus taught on city streets. Jesus taught on mountains. He taught on lakes. He even taught in graveyards. The message of grace can be given everywhere. It should start in our homes. And it's obvious that Mary loved sitting at the feet of Jesus, soaking in his teachings. Receiving his word was her joy. It was a pleasure. It had infinite and eternal value to her. Like it says in Psalm 119, 103, how sweet are your words to my taste, sweeter than honey to my mouth. Jeremiah 15, 16, your words were found and I ate them. Your word was to me the joy and rejoicing of my heart, for I'm called by your name, oh Lord God of hosts. And so Luke says in verse 39, notice that she sat at Jesus' feet and heard his word. The word heard in the original language, Greek language, it means to consider what has been said. When it speaks of her hearing his word or she heard his word, it can be defined to find out, to learn, to understand. Mary sat at his feet as a disciple, humbly hungering to understand his word. She wasn't one of these who would say that's a hard saying, who can understand it and just walk away. There are a lot of people who look at their spiritual lives like that. It's sad, but it's true. This is difficult to understand or it's quite a challenge. I'm not ready for it. That wasn't Mary. Mary sat there with humility, saying that this man has the words of life and I want to receive from him and I want my life changed completely by him. You see if you desire to grow in your walk with God, that's how you as a believer ought to listen. In Psalm 131, 1 and 2, it says, my heart is not proud, oh Lord. My eyes are not haughty. I do not concern myself with great matters or things too wonderful for me, but I have stilled and quieted my soul like a weaned child with its mother. Like a weaned child is my soul within me. Like a weaned child. And a baby is newborn and is nursed. Very often they will want to nurse even though they're not hungry. They will do that. There's some kind of attachment that they have sometimes that is very real and they're bonding with their mama and they just want to be attached to her but not necessarily nursing. When they get to be weaned, when they no longer need to be nursed, that baby stops always tugging at the breast and that baby begins to just feel comfortable settled in in the arms of their mama. And so that's what the Psalmist is saying. I'm a weaned child. I'm a child that wants to be close to the heart or the one who feeds me. And that's what it is when you get in the word of God. I want to be close. It's obvious that Mary knew that she had spiritual needs and it's obvious she knew that Jesus is the one who meets him and she knew that the best place for her was sitting at his feet receiving his instruction. She knew that Jesus gave words of life and wanted to receive from him. In Psalm 119, 130 it says, "'The entrance of your words gives light.'" He gives understanding to the simple. That simple thing I just said is lost on many today who are professing to be Christian. If you say you believe God's word provides you with all the spiritual insight necessary for a healthy and satisfied life, even Christians will consider you unenlightened and simple. Somehow Jesus has become deficient in the minds of many who profess Christ. John MacArthur once said, "'Can you imagine one of today's "'professional radio counselors simply telling "'a herding caller that God's grace is enough "'to meet the need?' "'Contemporary opinion is more utilitarian, "'valuing physical comfort more than spiritual well-being, "'self-esteem above Christlikeness, "'and good feelings over holy living.'" Many Christians seeking a sense of fulfillment have turned away from the rich resources of God's all-sufficient grace and are engrossed instead in a fruitless search for contentment in hollow human teachings. And that has taken place today. Instead of getting into the word and listening to what Christ has to say, people turn to other counselors. They want to hear what somebody else has to say, not Mary. Mary sat at the feet of Christ and received his word. You see, it's an incredible blessing when you consider it to be able to do something like that, to actually hear words of life from its source. What could be more of a blessing to hear God's word sitting at the feet of Jesus? When you read your Bible, you see that when Jesus would speak, people would listen intently. And many were amazed at the way he spoke. Luke 4.22 says all bore witness to him and marveled at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth. Could you imagine that? To hear Jesus Christ as he spoke. And the gracious words that would proceed out of his mouth that people would just hunger for and listen. And that's what Mary was doing. I mentioned to you a while back how that some had come to arrest Jesus and had come back without arresting him and the Pharisees who had sent them to arrest Jesus said, where is he? And all they could say in John 7.46 was no man ever spoke like this man. When they heard him speak these gracious words, they were spellbound. Can you imagine being in a home waiting to eat, sitting in a small front room area, Mary's right there at his feet listening intently to things that he says.  And she's just drinking it in, she's hearing what he says. And the internal light is being ignited. But as this is taking place and if you can get that in your mind's eye, this quiet scene in a front room, if you will, there's another scene going on in the other part of the house. In verse 40, Martha was distracted with much serving. So what's taking place is he's, oh man, I've got so many I have to take care of. And she's so busy and it says she was distracted. That word distracted means to be driven about mentally. She was over occupied and speaks of being too busy about a thing. She's being pushed back and forth by conflicting cares. She's got something here and then she's seen something there. She's got something here, but she sees something over there and she keeps on looking over there and she's thinking, I've got so much going on here. I don't know what to do. And where's my sister? And she looks over there and there's Mary just leaning there like that. She's not happy. She's not a happy big sister at all. She can't understand what's going on. Now, to be fair, we can understand why she'd be distracted. She's preparing supper for 16 people. You've got Jesus, you've got his 12, you've got Mary, you've got Lazarus, and you'd include her. There's 16 people gonna eat. That's a large meal. And there's no doubt you made a lavish meal for them. And that would be a great amount of work. It's like she's making a Thanksgiving dinner by herself. I don't know what you guys eat on Thanksgiving. I'll assume it's a turkey.  But if you're making a turkey, that's one thing you look at it every once in a while. I just thought of it. The first time we had a Thanksgiving dinner, we invited my mom and my dad over into our home. It was, Mary had never made a turkey before? Never. And so we invited mom and dad. We'd like to have you over for Thanksgiving. And they arrived at six that afternoon and Mary had just put the turkey in. She had just put the turkey in at five. We didn't eat Thanksgiving until almost midnight. Until almost midnight. But anyway, and it was really good. The distraction, all the noise, all the hustle, all the bustle, all those people. She's doing the best that she can for Jesus. She's making the best meal that she can prepare. I don't think she was just trying to impress him. I believe she wanted to provide what he deserved. She was giving her best offering and she wanted it to be a blessing to him. And she may have resented the fact that her sister is seated while she's standing. Now that's one of the most common temptations believers are trapped by. We can become overly concerned with what we're doing and forget why we do it.  You're having Thanksgiving or Christmas, Easter, and all of these are religious celebrations. But even though it's built on such amazing things, you can get upset. You can get tired, you can get frustrated. You can say, I wish this is just over. You know, there are people I've spoken to is, yeah, Thanksgiving is coming. Yeah, I dread it. I dread it. Why? Because the family's coming over. Families can be fun. They can be fun or they can be frustrating.  I'll tell you, when my kids were in their teen years, my two oldest just would, they would go at it with each other. They would just say something dumb and the other one would get mad and then they'd say something back and I'd be sitting there eating and I'd be looking at this and I'd say, I finally, I told Brewery, I'm not taking those brats out anymore. You want to take them out, you take them out. I'm not, I don't want, they're just always grumpy with each other and it makes them meal and sometimes it would be loud enough for people at the next table to hear us snipping at each other. It's not always fun. It's not always fun and especially if you were in that kitchen, by yourself, doing everything and then you're looking and you're saying, man, I could use some help, I'm making a meal for 16 people and she's over there laying, they're going, oh, Jesus, Goo Goo Gaga. I mean, this bothers me. It bothers me. Why are you doing that? And that's what happens to her. She's distracted. Her mind is moving from place to place with much serving. So what does she do? She approached him and said, Lord, do you not care that my sister has left me to serve alone? Therefore tell her to help me. Can you hear the frustration in her voice? She approached him. That word approached in the original. She came in the room hurriedly. She was in a tizzy. She was petulant. She was overworked. She was frazzled and perhaps even a bit jealous of Mary who's there close to Christ when she's in another room. So she's blaming Jesus for what Mary seems to be neglecting. Now she's an older sister. My wife is the older sister. And I guess I must have some ladies in here that would be the older sister in the family.  To this day, they still look at her when there's decisions being made because she's the older sister. They carry a lot of authority and power. They really do. And Martha walks in and she's using her authority and she is upset and she begins to complain and she walks in and you've got to see it.  And she's speaking to the Lord and she speaks disrespectfully. She not only questions him, she takes it upon herself to give him orders. Don't you care that my sister's left me to serve alone? Tell her to help me. Can you hear that? I've never told Jesus what to do. I have done it so many times in my prayers. Lord, if you would only do it this way. I know you're busy with the universe and perhaps you could use a little advice. Sometimes my prayers are like that, instructive rather than asking. Then notice, she's giving him orders. Don't you care that my sister has left me to serve alone? Tell her to help me. Seeing that she's busy listening to you, how about telling her as she's listening to help me? Now, what do we learn? What do we learn from Martha that is not proper when we serve the Lord? Well, one, Martha attached too much importance to what she was doing for Jesus. As the hostess, she was just too busy to enjoy what was going on herself. Serving Jesus became a work and a duty and her motives were no longer pure. For Martha, what more than likely had begun in the right spirit ended up in the flesh. An elaborate meal or a perfect order in the house was not necessary for Jesus. Martha's perfectionism and frustration interrupted a Bible study. Think about that. Her concern for herself was greater than her concern for the people learning from God himself. And that's what can happen. She forgot who she was serving and she began to take it personally and she got frustrated. In Colossians 3, 23 and 24, whatever you do, do it heartily as to the Lord and not to men. Knowing that from the Lord, you will receive the reward of the inheritance for you serve the Lord Christ. Remember that you may be in ministry, you may be serving, somebody didn't show up, you're carrying the extra load and you get upset and you complain to the Lord, don't you care? I've already got so much I'm doing and now I have to carry this. It's just not fair. I'll keep that in mind. That was Martha. A second unnecessary thing was Martha's anxious and troubled mind. Again, Martha became distracted. She was overwhelmed, mentally stressed and because of the work, she lost touch with the peace and joy that is given her by the Lord. Serving the Lord isn't simply a work, it's a work of love and it's done for him out of a thankful heart. In Colossians 3, 15, let the peace of God rule in your heart to which you are also called in one body. Be thankful. So our service to the Lord is not out of obligation, it's a joy to serve him. It's God's love for us that has fueled our love for him and we joyfully serve the Lord. It's like what Paul said in 2 Corinthians 5, 14, the love of Christ compiles us. And when you lose sight of why you serve Jesus Christ, you will also lose his peace and joy. A third unnecessary thing was Martha's attitude toward people. She resented serving all by herself and was angry because nobody was helping her. Here's the question. Who wants to eat a meal prepared by a grumpy cook? Remember 2 Corinthians 9, 7 says, God loves a cheerful giver. So I've come to see that serving the Lord is a joy and it's fulfilling. Our regular occupations cannot give a sense of spiritual joy and fulfillment that we need. Our regular occupations cannot do that. Ruling Egypt didn't satisfy Moses. Being a shepherd did not satisfy David. Tending fruit trees did not satisfy the prophet Amos. Fishing did not satisfy John. Gathering taxes did not satisfy Matthew. Nationalistic politics did not satisfy Simon the zealot. Money did not satisfy Zacchaeus. Religion did not satisfy Nicodemus and theology did not satisfy Paul. So serving God fills a void that our jobs cannot fill. We have people in this church, roshers and childcare ministers and variety that in their day jobs, they're prestigious, lawyers and things of that sort. Serving the Lord, the practice of law is not fulfilling them. What fulfills them is serving God. That's where your true fulfillment comes from. No matter what the occupation you have, it may be good, it provides food for the table, pays your bills and that's a good thing. Thank God for jobs. But spiritually, they never satisfy. They can't, how can they drive in a truck? How is that gonna satisfy my spiritual hunger? And so it's always good to serve the Lord because he fulfills that and satisfies that desire. And a fourth unnecessary thing was her disrespect. She made comments to the Lord and there were others present. Imagine that. She walks in and picture will say at the door with her hands on her hips, looking at Jesus, but there's all these people there and she starts, imagine that. I wonder how the people responded to that. That might have been an interesting selfie. How do you think? Do you think they looked at her like? I probably, I don't know. It must have been an odd feeling for her to stand there. Don't you care? Tell her to help me. And you've got all these people looking up at her and she's interrupted the word of God. And she's interrupted that with her complaint. Don't you care? How can you ever ask God? That kind of question. Don't you care? Don't you? Jesus died on the cross to show me how deeply he cared. And you're asking him, how come you don't care for me? Cause I'm not doing what you want right now to satisfy you and that clock in your head that this has to be done at your time or it's not the right thing and I'm not good and I don't care. That's how we can be with the Lord. How come you're not moving? How come you haven't helped? Oh Lord, I have cried you. I'll never forget the young lady who said to me, is Lord gonna ever answer my prayer? I've been in such a trial. I've been asking God to help me. I've been in this trial for three weeks already. I had three weeks.  I've been married a long time for Marie. Some trials can last a lifetime. When are you gonna remove it? And the Lord says, no, this is that thorn in your flesh that keeps you dependent on me. You're asking me to remove that which draws you close to me. You don't understand? Don't you care? That is the worst thing. Listen carefully that you can ever ask of God. God, don't you care? And there are so many. You know why we say that? Because we think he's on our timetable and we think he's supposed to be our butler in heaven. We might as well pray that our butler who aren't in heaven because that's what we think God is very often. You move when I say and you do what I need and if you don't, you don't love me. So we try and put this move on the Lord to bring him under submission to our will when in fact, God is doing what is necessary so I can be what I've prayed for. I wanna be a man of God. And he says, all these things in your life to test you in order to refine you, to purify you so that I can work best with you. And that's what takes place. We are the clay. He is the potter. We are all the works of his hand. I was speaking to a potter on one occasion. I know nothing about throwing pots. I smoked a lot of pots, but I didn't, I don't know anything about throwing them. And he was saying to me as a potter, he says, you can take this clay and he's telling me how he made pots and things. And he says, but you know, there's always the willful clay. And he used that term. I said, willful clay, now I've never heard that. What is willful clay? He said, willful clay, we call it willful clay because it has a mind of its own. He says, you'll get it, you put it on the wheel, you begin to spin it, you take your hands, you wet them, you begin to work with the clay, but it has a mind of its own. It will not be shaped by your hands. And he says, you know what we usually do with that? That willful clay. I said, what? He said, we make ashtrays. We'll make some vessel that has no honor. It's not necessary. It's a willful clay. And that connected with me when Isaiah said, you are the potter and we are the clay and we're the works of your hand. And that's when I began to pray, God, help me not to be willful clay. Help me not to be that kind of clay that tells you what to make me into. God is the potter. We are simply the clay. And he forms us in his image. That's how it works. And we need to understand that. So God does that work. So she accuses Jesus if not caring and demands that he tell Mary to help her. And again, that's the inevitable result of laboring in the flesh. We blame God for our own dissatisfaction. And we believe that he isn't aware of what's going on. Like the psalmist in Psalm 10 verse one said, why do you stand afar off, oh Lord? Why do you hide in times of trouble? All of that Martha was doing for Jesus was appreciated. But it wasn't the highest priority. So in verse 41, Jesus answered and said to her, Martha, Martha, you're worried and troubled. You're worried and troubled about many things. Your busyness to serve me, undermine your opportunity to learn of me. In Matthew 11, 28, Jesus says, come to me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, I will give you rest. And you have failed to understand that at my feet is the best place because that's where you get rest. But you, you're so busy that you're not resting in me. And he goes on and says, one thing is needed. Mary has chosen that good part, which will not be taken away from her. Mary has chosen the most important thing, to fellowship with me, to be taught by me so she knows how to serve me. It's like what it says in Psalm 27, four, one thing I have desired of the Lord and that will I seek, that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life. To behold the beauty of the Lord and to inquire in his temple. She knew the one thing most needed was for her to be seated at the feet of Christ.  And that equipped her to offer service to him, springing from understanding and love. When you get married, even prior to that, but once you're married, should you get married? You begin to learn some things about the person you're married to. There are things that you can do that you think is showing them that you love them when in fact it's something they don't want or need. And then you get hurt feelings because they don't see this thing that you did was from your heart for them because it's the way you show love. And in marriage, I had to learn that with my wife because there were things that I would do that I thought were showing her, I loved her, that just irritated her. And we had to learn how to communicate, that takes some time. I used to write Marie handwritten Valentine Days cards. I love you baby, you're the sweetest or whatever, and I'd put them in an envelope and give them to her.  I said, what? I would write her songs. I would do those things because I'm of that sort. But she didn't appreciate it. She would say to me, it is greater demonstration of your love to me if you take the time out of your life to actually purchase something. And I thought, are you kidding me? This takes creative urges. She said, yeah, and it's also free. No, no, it cost me my soul. No, she, so I ended up getting her cards and things like that because that's how she understood love. I didn't appreciate it. I thought it hurt my feelings. I'll be real with you. It hurt my feelings. I thought, man, she's thinking that I'm doing this because I'm cheap. How'd she know? No, she's thinking, and it hurt, but you know what? She's long come ago. I won't say this second service because it bothers her. I'm telling you guys, she's not here because she said, I didn't realize at that time that's how you showed your love to me. See, so we have to learn. This is so practical. We need to learn the love language of the other person. We have to learn that language. What is love to me may not be love to her. It may not be what she thinks is love. She's got her own way of defining it. I had to learn her language and it's not easy learning a second language. It isn't, but you have to learn it. And I've done that. I've learned her language. Yeah, she comes up with new words every once in a while and I gotta figure that one out. And she does the same with me. She does the same with me. Giving somebody something they don't want is never appreciated. So Mary was learning to give Jesus what he wanted. So she's not forcing him, she's learning from him. And Martha had to learn the love language of Christ. One thing matters, Jesus said. Mary chose the greater part. I don't need your matzabal soup. Martha, I need your heart. I don't need your sweat. And all that bustling and banging those pans and then what does it do?  No, your sister knows what to do. She listened to me and she knows what it is I require. Whereas you, you think your work is something I need, which it isn't. What I need is your full attention because all service to the Lord begins at his feet. And some of us in this room have forgotten because we get busy trying to serve God and please God when all the Lord is saying right now is can you settle down for a minute? Can you just take a breath? Can you stop complaining to me about all that's not going on that you want? And do you honestly think I'm not in control of what's going on? And I need your advice. Have you ever thought to just sit and be still like a weaned child and enjoy my fellowship so I can show you things about me that you can take to others that are fresh and real and for the moment? Or do you really think I need your efforts? Because I don't, because I don't. What I need is your heart. And that's where ministry begins. Not in all that we do, but in all that we hear. And then we do that which pleases him. That's where it begins. We wait on the Lord. Isaiah 40, 31. Those who wait on the Lord shall renew their strength. They shall mount up with wings as eagles. They shall run and not be weary. They shall walk and not faint. Take my yoke upon you and learn of me. And that's what Mary was doing. And that's what the church today needs to learn to do again.