六国论

《六国论》原文

六国破灭，非兵不利 ，战不善，弊在赂秦。赂秦而力亏，破灭之道也。或曰：六国互丧，率赂秦耶？曰：不赂者以赂者丧。盖失强援，不能独完。故曰：弊在赂秦也。
秦以攻取之外，小则获邑，大则得城。较秦之所得，与战胜而得者，其实百倍；诸侯之所亡，与战败而亡者，其实亦百倍。则秦之所大欲，诸侯之所大患，固不在战矣。思厥先祖父，暴霜露，斩荆棘，以有尺寸之地。子孙视之不甚惜，举以予人，如弃草芥。今日割五城，明日割十城，然后得一夕安寝。起视四境，而秦兵又至矣。然则诸侯之地有限，暴秦之欲无厌，奉之弥繁，侵之愈急。故不战而强弱胜负已判矣。至于颠覆，理固宜然。古人云：“以地事秦，犹抱薪救火，薪不尽，火不灭。”此言得之。
齐人未尝赂秦，终继五国迁灭，何哉？与嬴而不助五国也。五国既丧，齐亦不免矣。燕赵之君，始有远略，能守其土，义不赂秦。是故燕虽小国而后亡，斯用兵之效也。至丹以荆卿为计，始速祸焉。赵尝五战于秦，二败而三胜。后秦击赵者再，李牧连却之。洎牧以谗诛，邯郸为郡，惜其用武而不终也。且燕赵处秦革灭殆尽之际，可谓智力孤危，战败而亡，诚不得已。向使三国各爱其地，齐人勿附于秦，刺客不行，良将犹在，则胜负之数，存亡之理，当与秦相较，或未易量。
呜呼！以赂秦之地，封天下之谋臣，以事秦之心，礼天下之奇才，并力西向，则吾恐秦人食之不得下咽也。悲夫！有如此之势，而为秦人积威之所劫，日削月割，以趋于亡。为国者无使为积威之所劫哉！
夫六国与秦皆诸侯，其势弱于秦，而犹有可以不赂而胜之之势。苟以天下之大，下而从六国破亡之故事，是又在六国下矣。

中文翻译

六国的灭亡，不是（因为他们的）武器不锋利，仗打得不好，弊端在于用土地来贿赂秦国。拿土地贿赂秦国亏损了自己的力量，（这就）是灭亡的原因。有人问：“六国一个接一个的灭亡，难道全部是因为贿赂秦国吗？”（回答）说：“不贿赂秦国的国家因为有贿赂秦国的国家而灭亡。原因是不贿赂秦国的国家失掉了强有力的外援，不能独自保全。所以说：弊病在于贿赂秦国啊。”
秦国除了用战争夺取土地以外，（还受到诸侯的贿赂），小的就获得邑镇，大的就获得城池。比较秦国受贿赂所得到的土地与战胜别国所得到的土地，(前者)实际多百倍。六国诸侯（贿赂秦国）所丧失的土地与战败所丧失的土地相比，实际也要多百倍。那么秦国最想要的，与六国诸侯最担心的，本来就不在于战争。想到他们的祖辈和父辈，冒着寒霜雨露，披荆斩棘，才有了很少的一点土地。子孙对那些土地却不很爱惜，全都拿来送给别人，就像扔掉小草一样不珍惜。今天割掉五座城，明天割掉十座城，这才能睡一夜安稳觉。明天起床一看四周边境，秦国的军队又来了。既然这样，那么诸侯的土地有限，强暴的秦国的欲望永远不会满足，（诸侯）送给他的越多，他侵犯得就越急迫。所以用不着战争，谁强谁弱，谁胜谁负就已经决定了。到了覆灭的地步,道理本来就是这样子的。古人说：“用土地侍奉秦国，就好像抱柴救火，柴不烧完，火就不会灭。”这话说的很正确。
齐国不曾贿赂秦国，（可是）终于也随着五国灭亡了，为什么呢？（是因为齐国）跟秦国交好而不帮助其他五国。五国已经灭亡了，齐国也就没法幸免了。燕国和赵国的国君，起初有长远的谋略，能守住他们的疆土，坚持正义，不拿土地贿赂秦国。因此燕虽然是个小国，却后来才灭亡，这就是用兵抗秦的效果。等到后来燕太子丹用派遣荆轲刺杀秦王作对付秦国的计策，这才招致了（灭亡的）祸患。赵国曾经与秦国交战了五次，打了两次败仗，三次胜仗。后来秦国两次攻打赵国。（赵国大将）李牧接连打退秦国的进攻。等到李牧因受诬陷而被杀死，（赵国都城）邯郸变成（秦国的一个）郡，可惜赵国用武力抗秦而没能坚持到底。而且燕赵两国正处在秦国把其他国家快要消灭干净的时候，可以说是智谋穷竭，国势孤立危急，战败了而亡国，确实是不得已的事。假使韩、魏、楚三国都爱惜他们的国土，齐国不依附秦国。（燕国的）刺客不去（刺秦王）（赵国的）良将李牧还活着，那么胜败的命运，存亡的理数，倘若与秦国相比较，也许还不容易衡量（出高低来）呢。
唉！（如果六国诸侯）用贿赂秦国的土地来封给天下的谋臣，用侍奉秦国的心来礼遇天下的奇才，齐心合力地向西（对付秦国），那么，我恐怕秦国人饭也不能咽下去。真可悲啊！有这样的有利形势，却被秦国积久的威势所胁迫，天天割地，月月割地，以至于走向灭亡。治理国家的人不要被积久的威势所胁迫啊！
六国和秦国都是诸侯之国，他们的势力比秦国弱，却还有可以不贿赂秦国而战胜它的优势。如果凭借偌大国家，却追随六国灭亡的前例，这就比不上六国了。

英文翻译

The downfall of the six states was not due to the inferiority of their weapons or the incompetence in warfare. The root cause lay in bribing the State of Qin. By offering territories to Qin, they weakened their own strength, which was the path to their destruction. Some may ask, "Did all the six states perish because of bribing Qin?" The answer is that those who did not bribe Qin perished because of those who did. Without strong external support, they could not survive alone. Therefore, it can be concluded that the problem was bribing Qin.
Apart from territorial expansion through warfare, Qin also acquired lands through bribery. Small bribes won them towns, while large ones brought them cities. Comparing what Qin gained from bribery with what it obtained through military victories, the former was actually a hundred times more. Similarly, the territories lost by the six states due to bribery were also a hundred times more than those lost in wars. Thus, what Qin desired most and what the six states feared most were not really about warfare. Reflecting on the hardships endured by their ancestors, who braved the elements and overcame numerous obstacles to acquire a small piece of land, their descendants showed little regard for it. They gave it away as if it were worthless. One day they ceded five cities, the next ten, just to gain a night's peace. But when they woke up and looked around, the Qin army was already at their borders. With limited territories and insatiable greed of Qin, the more they offered, the more aggressively Qin invaded. Therefore, without even going to war, the outcome of who was stronger and who would win or lose was already determined. Eventually, they all perished, which was only natural. As an ancient saying goes, "Using land to serve Qin is like carrying firewood to put out a fire. As long as the firewood is not exhausted, the fire will never go out." This statement is very accurate.
The State of Qi never bribed Qin, yet it still perished along with the other five states. Why? Because it aligned itself with Qin instead of supporting the other five states. Once the other five states were gone, Qi could not escape the same fate. The rulers of Yan and Zhao initially had far - reaching strategies and were able to defend their territories and uphold justice without bribing Qin. As a result, although Yan was a small state, it perished later, which was the effect of using military force against Qin. However, when Prince Dan of Yan devised a plan to send Jing Ke to assassinate the King of Qin, it brought about the disaster of destruction. The State of Zhao fought five battles against Qin, winning two and losing three. Later, when Qin attacked Zhao twice, General Li Mu repelled the attacks successively. But after Li Mu was executed due to slander, Handan became a county of Qin. It was a pity that Zhao failed to persevere in using military force. Moreover, when Yan and Zhao were on the verge of being completely wiped out by Qin, they were in a situation of desperate intelligence and isolated power. Their defeat and downfall were indeed inevitable. If the three states of Han, Wei, and Chu had cherished their territories, and Qi had not aligned with Qin; if the assassins had not carried out their plans, and the good generals were still alive, then the outcome of victory or defeat and survival or destruction, when compared with Qin, might not have been so easily determined.
Alas! If the six states had used the territories they bribed Qin with to recruit the wise ministers of the world, and used the attitude of serving Qin to treat the extraordinary talents of the world, and united to face west (against Qin), then I'm afraid the people of Qin would not be able to swallow their food. How lamentable! With such a favorable situation, they were coerced by the long - standing power of Qin. They ceded land day by day and month by month, until they finally perished. Those who govern a country should not be coerced by the accumulated power of others!
The six states and Qin were all vassal states. Although their power was weaker than that of Qin, they still had the advantage of being able to defeat Qin without bribing it. If a large country like them followed the example of the six states' downfall, they would be even worse than the six states.

背景补充

创作背景

北宋建国后，鉴于五代十国藩镇割据、武将专权导致国家分裂动荡的教训，采取了一系列加强中央集权的措施，如收精兵、削实权、制钱谷等。这些措施虽然巩固了中央政权，但也带来了一些负面影响，如军队战斗力下降、官僚机构臃肿、财政负担加重等。
与此同时，北宋面临着来自辽国和西夏的威胁。为了维持边境的和平，北宋政府每年都要向辽国和西夏输送大量的岁币，这无疑加重了百姓的负担，也使得北宋在外交上处于被动地位。苏洵生活在北宋中期，他目睹了国家的积贫积弱和对外政策的软弱，深感忧虑。于是，他以六国灭亡的历史为题材，撰写了《六国论》，借古讽今，旨在告诫北宋统治者要吸取历史教训，不要重蹈六国赂敌而亡的覆辙，要奋起抵抗外敌，维护国家的独立和安全。

作者简介

苏洵（1009 年 - 1066 年），字明允，自号老泉，眉州眉山（今属四川眉山）人，北宋文学家，“唐宋八大家”之一。苏洵年少时不爱读书，喜欢四处游玩。直到二十七岁，他才幡然醒悟，开始发愤读书。然而，他在科举考试中并不顺利，多次应试都未能中第。后来，他将自己的文章呈给翰林学士欧阳修，得到了欧阳修的赏识和推荐，文章开始在京城流传，苏洵也因此声名大噪。
苏洵擅长散文，他的文章以议论见长，笔锋老辣，纵横恣肆，具有很强的说服力和感染力。他的代表作品除了《六国论》外，还有《嘉祐集》等。苏洵与其子苏轼、苏辙并称“三苏”，均在“唐宋八大家”之列，一门三杰，传为佳话。

文章主旨

《六国论》的主旨在于借古讽今。作者通过对六国灭亡原因的分析，指出六国灭亡的根本原因是“赂秦”，并进一步阐述了不贿赂秦国而灭亡的国家也是因为失去了强有力的外援。在此基础上，作者将历史与现实相结合，批评北宋统治者对辽国和西夏的屈辱求和政策，认为这种政策就像六国赂秦一样，会使国家逐渐走向衰亡。作者希望北宋统治者能够吸取历史教训，振作精神，增强国力，坚决抵抗外敌，以维护国家的尊严和安全。

作品影响

《六国论》是苏洵散文的代表作之一，具有很高的文学价值和社会意义。在文学方面，文章论证严密，逻辑清晰，语言生动形象，具有很强的说服力和感染力，对后世的散文创作产生了深远的影响。在社会方面，文章借古讽今，针砭时弊，对北宋统治者的外交政策提出了尖锐的批评，具有一定的警示作用。它提醒统治者要从历史中吸取教训，不能重蹈覆辙，要以积极的态度应对外部挑战，维护国家的利益和尊严。《六国论》也因此成为了中国古代散文中的经典之作，被后人广泛传颂和学习。