How to behave when others are overindulging

Allen is still on the priest presuming to write as a baron so that people will heed and not dismiss him as presumptuous priest that he is. The baron makes things happen, the priest goes along for the ride, yet here he is pretending and presuming to instruct people better than himself.

I made all that up. Allen doesn't say this. It's accepted Egyptian literature. But its introduction and its colophon say that it's something it's not. It says that it's written much earlier, by hundreds of years, while its etymological placement in its language's evolution and its usage, its word forms, and its idioms place it squarely in late Middle Egyptian. Allen doesn't say that vizier wouldn't write this. A vizier would simply show his children how to behave by example and individual correction, he would write about his exploits in Nubia, about the people he conquered, the hardships he overcame, the armies he conquered, the cataracts he got by,  the dwarfs he brought back to the court who became favorites. He'd list the amounts of gold that brought back, silver and gems, and exotic animals. He be talking about his battles with Libyans and with Asians. He would not write a scroll about what he teaches his children to be better children than average.

But a priest would.

Such as Søren Kierkegaard, Martin Luther, Gregor Mendel, John Main, Binyamin Elon, Jean-Francois Revel,  Thich Nhat Hanh, Thomas Aquinas, Jakob Frohschammer, Origen, Augustine of Hippo, William of Ockham, George Lemaitre, to name only a few philosophical monks and priests. They sat around all day meditating and thinking of how to better the world and they could all read and write.

This is one such. He is not a vizier writing down his instructions about how his children should behave as he says within them.  So foremost he's a big fat fake out liar. And his writings were accepted and copied and used, and they lasted. Wait!  Brb. The planet is doing something spectacular.

My window to the world. That lasted less than one minute. 

What does the Letitia Baldridge of Thebes say this time? 

If you find yourself with a pig, let him finish, if he ever does. Same thing if you find yourself with a fallen down sot. Another vizier, no doubt. Same thing with meat. Accept only what is offered and be happy with that. If you don't show any indications of gluttony then you cannot be blamed for avarice. 

I failed. 

I sure did like that fruit salad. That was the best thing at the party. Better even than pork bbq ribs and better than roasted whole beef tenderloin, and both of those were excellent. So I ate it then refilled, then ate that and refilled, then ate that and refilled again and ate that.

What a pig. 

Then I came home and made a massive fruit salad with everything found at the grocery that day. 

And ate the h-e-double fruit sticks out of the whole thing. 

Then the fruit flies took over. 

Good Lord, they were all over the place. 

They must come on the skins of the fruit. Their little invisible fruit-fly eggs must. 

I had just taken out the trash so the rinds went into an empty plastic-lined bin. The fruit flies that hatched showed me all over the kitchen where I must wipe with Clorox; the refrigerator door handle, the rim of the hood over the stove, the corner of the wall over the trash bin. 

Then I prepared a trap. 

The thing is, a lot of flies don't go into the trap, they stay on the rim of the bowl containing the trap. So the trap rim is trapped too and that kills them all overnight. When they rest elsewhere then shoo them away and eventually they all go to the trap. 

I'll draw you a picture.

Diatomaceous earth powder around rim. 

They're itty-bitty fossilized organisms. Shame to use them this way.

Carnage

The ancient priest posing as vizier says:

* If you sit down with a glutton you should eat only when his lust has passed.

* If you drink with a drunkard you should accept when his appetite is sated.

* Dont rage for meat beside one who is ravenous, you should accept only when he gives to you

* Dont reject it, then it will be something soothing.

* As for him who is free of an accusation of bread, no word can take control of him.

* He whose face is averted from feeding the appetite, the harsh man has to be kinder to him than his mother, and everyone is his dependent. 

(Allen writes "dependant" and that's how they say it in the military too. It's what they called me. With emphasis on "ant".)

Being accused of bread means being accused of gluttony.

I'm guilty of that too, because really good homemade bread is not all that common in restaurants around here. I do better myself at home. So when it does show up, I'm all scarf, scarf, scarf, scarf, like that pig that I am. 

I did it backward this time. First the groupings with translations, then Allen's notes, then the transliterations. Then the removal of superfluous signs. Doing it this microscopically granular shows inconsistencies in Allens transliteration. He shows a "k" sound where a "eh" sound is put, for example, so I changed it to the sound Allen needed to arrive at his translation to make sense. At this point, my translation would be a LOT goofier than his. Mine wouldn't make any sense at all.