However, if one will not act in such a manner [as is befitting, not trusting in HaShem that He will right the wrong], and will [instead] constantly quarrel with his fellow because of this [wrong that his fellow committed against him], even if the truth lies with him, nevertheless, this [reprisal taken against his fellow] will not [bring] satisfaction [to] HaShem Yisbarach, just as [is the case with] the father [who does not find content at the time] when [he sees] his sons quarrel over the portions [of food] that [the father] provided them [at] his table, as is mentioned previously, [in the parable].
When one will act [in an appropriate manner by] maintaining the attribute of trust [in HaShem, confident that HaShem will right the wrong inflicted upon him, and thus] not take retribution against one who wronged him], he will merit to see of the kindness and of the goodness of The Holy One, Blessed is He, as the pasuk [from “Tehillim”] states, “You shall taste and see that HaShem is good, praiseworthy is the man who takes shelter in Him.” (Tehillim: 34; 9) [When the pasuk] states “taste and see”, [it comes] to teach us, [that] just as [it is the case with] someone who tastes something in his mouth [and thereby] recognizes [the qualities of the food] that he tastes, so too [is this evident] of one who truly possesses the attribute of trust [in HaShem, for this person] recognizes the greatness of the goodness of The Holy One, Blessed is He.
 The entire gemara in this discussion, reads as follows:
“Rav said, ‘On account of four matters, the property of homeowners goes down the drain: 1) [On account of those who] withhold the wage of a hired worker, 2) [on account of one who] steals the wage of a hired worker, 3) [on account of] removing the yoke from one’s neck and puts it on their fellows, and 4) [on account of] haughtiness of spirit, and haughtiness of spirit is equivalent to all of them. However, concerning those who are humble, it is written, “And the humble will inherit the earth and shall take delight on an abundance of peace.” (Tehillim: 37; 11)’” (Sukkah, 29b)
The MaHaRSh”A explains that the haughty leaders will expect their fellows to take upon themselves the yoke of leadership in their place. The MaHaRSh”A also notes that the individual performs the first three of the aforementioned sins as he is haughty.
 Though in the Hebrew text, it notes that the teaching is found in the third chapter of “Derech Eretz Zuta”, this teaching has been found in the second chapter of “Derech Eretz Zuta” (halacha 2). It’s possible that there are versions of “Derech Eretz Zuta” which do record this teaching as being in the third chapter.
The teaching in maseches “Derech Eretz Zuta”, states as follows:
“If you have become lax in [the performance of] one mitzvah, you will eventually similarly become lax in another mitzvah. If you have uprooted yourself to become lenient with one mitzvah, you will eventually similarly become lax with another mitzvah. If you have willingly transgressed the words of The Torah, they will eventually cause you to transgress [the words of The Torah], whether willingly or unwillingly, and you will not [receive] reward [due to] your suffering. If you have taken that which does not belong to you, even that which belongs to you, they will be taken from you.”
 The text of the gemara (Bava Kamma, 119a), states as follows:
“Rabbi Yochanan said, ‘All those who rob that which is equivalent in value to a p’rtuah, from [their] fellow, it is considered as if he has taken his life from him, as it says [in the following pasuk from “Mishlei”]: “Such is the way of all of those who steal, they take the lives of the owners [of the stolen item].” (1; 19), and it states, “And he ate your harvest and your bread… your sons and your daughters…” (Yirmiyahu: 5; 17), and it states, “…from the robbery of the children of Yehuda, that they have spilled the blood of those who are innocent in your land.” (Yoel: 4; 19), and it states, “…and to Shaul and to the House of Blood, on [account of that which] they killed the Givonites.”’ (Shmuel II: 21; 1)”
“What is the meaning [of writing “and it states” to introduce more pesukim that deal with the sin of theft]? If you will [suggest that it is] the life [of the victim of the theft which is taken], however, the lives of his sons and daughters [are] not [taken, that is not the case, for the pasuk from sefer “Yirmiyahu”] comes to inform [us that] the flesh of his sons and daughters [is consumed]. If you will [suggest that the above is true in the case] where the [thief] did not give money [for the stolen item], however, in a situation where he gave money [for the item that was taken against the will of the owner], this would not be the case [that it is considered as if he took the lives of the victim and of his children. [Therefore, the pasuk from sefer “Yoel”] comes to inform us “…from the chamas – extortion* – of the Children of Yehuda, that you spilled the blood of innocent people in their land.” If you will [suggest that it is considered as if the robber took the life of the victims of the robbery ] in a situation when [the robbery] is committed with one’s hands, however, [if one steals from another through] an indirect action, [the thief is] not [considered to have taken the lives of his victims. Therefore, the pasuk from sefer “Shmuel II”] comes to inform [us], “…to Shaul and to the House of Blood, concerning that which he killed the Givonites.” Where do we find that Shaul killed the Givonites? Rather, since he killed Nov, the city of the kohanim, who provided water and sustenance to [the Givonites], the pasuk considers it as if [Shaul] killed [the Givonites].”
* In this context, “chamas” refers to the type of robbery committed when the thief snatches the given item against the consent of the victim, and gives money to the victim for the stolen item.
 Rabbi Chama quotes this teaching in the gemara in the name of Rabbi Chanina.
 This parable is found on the 26th day of Teves.