Even if a slave were to learn the Persian language, he would still remain a slave. How can he claim to be a chieftain when he is pulled down by the two contraries (i.e. his scholarly acquirements and a slavish and retarded mentality?) A thirsty person gets relieved if he gets water; similarly a hungry man is relieved by food. But this slave is definitely proletariat, and he can not be grouped with the patricians.
Note: (1) There is another interpretation of the verse as under: These are two men. One of them is evolved and the other unevolved. The latter is a slave of materialistic tendencies. He feels relieved only when he satisfies the bodily claims. How can he be grouped with the evolved man who is self abnegatious? Obviously both of them will remain in different categories.
(2) The last sentence of the above verse reflects the deep learning of the poet. He seems to have followed the thinking of lmam Ghazali who partitioned the mankind into (a)عوام الناس or the commoners (or the ignorants) (b) خواصor partly evolved and (c)خاص الخاص .or the elite, the well initiated.
And when they come to you, they say: “We believe”, but the fact is that they came with disbelief and also went out with it. And Allah knows (well) what they have been concealing. (61, Maida).
از ناکئی خار بر دیوار دانستم،
کہ ناکس نہ شود کس از باد نشین ما۔
I could conclude from the insignificance of thorns on a wall that a worthless person can not become worthy merely because of his high position.