I have seen the following presented as an anonymous Buddhist saying:

Not every poem’s good because it’s ancient,
Nor mayst thou blame it just because it’s new,
Fair critics test, and prove, and so pass judgment;
Fools praise or blame as they hear others do.

Interesting, and perhaps naive, challenge to Lincoln’s prophetic “You can please some of the people all of the time…”. The poem seems to suggest that you can actually achieve some kind of vaulted “fair critic” status and escape the tragedy of the fool. But what if the others are more qualified than you and you do not have the resources or expertise to reach conclusive judgment? Who decides fairness, or what constitutes sufficient “test and prove”?

I am not convinced of the Buddhist connection. For example, compare it to the actual teachings in the Dhammapada:

‘They blame him who sits silent
And him that has much to say;
They blame the one that’s of measured speech;
In the world there is none unblamed.’

Maybe it’s just me but that makes the first verse look more like a protestant attribution of righteousness. I mean should those blamed by the fair critic(s) feel more enlightened than those blamed by the fools? Where’s the middle path?