your wealth is not enough for your seekers nor does it reach the satisfaction of those who seek it. if you were to please them by displeasing their equals that would be a clear loss. how can one who displeasing be many times greater than one who pleases and the satire of the displeasing one is more harmful than the loss of the praise of the satisfied? and if they attack you with their thorns and deal you with their arrows you will not see anyone whom you have pleased in their displeasure who will fight for you or satirize a poet less than you but rather he will leave you as a target for their arrows and a shield for their arrows then he will say what would have happened to him if he had pleased them? how can he please them when the satisfaction of all is something that cannot be attained? and the first said how can you agree to the satisfaction of those who differ? and they said preventing all is more pleasing to all.
إن مالك لا يسع مريديه ولا يبلغ رضى طالبيه. ولو أرضيتهم باسخاط مثلهم، لكان ذلك خسرانا مبينا. فكيف ومن يسخط أضعاف من يرضى، وهجاء الساخط أضر من فقد مديح الراضي؟ وعلى أنهم إذا اعتوروك بمشاقصهم وتداولوك بسهامهم ٢ ، لم تر ممن أرضيته في أسخاطهم أحدا يناضل عنك ولا يهاجي شاعرا دونك، بل يخليك غرضا لسهامهم ودريئة لنبالهم، ثم يقول وما كان عليه لو أرضاهم؟ فكيف يرضيهم، ورضى الجميع شيء لا ينال؟ وقد قال الأول وكيف يتفق لك رضى المختلفين؟ وقالوا منع الجميع أرضى للجميع.