| 摘要: | 春秋史上，燭之武與蹇叔為鄭、秦名臣。二者先後說秦穆，《左傳》「燭之武退秦師」、「蹇叔哭師」二文中，詳載其絕妙經典辭令。說秦穆，雙方各有其背景，辭令之基本模式亦迥異，燭之武主婉言層遞漸進法，蹇叔則採直言犯顏激進法。雖然兩者的辭令技巧，皆以「動之以情」、「說之以理」、「曉以利害」為主軸，但內容截然不同。燭之武以低姿態開啟穆公傾聽的契機，並以天秤原理透析秦、晉的利益糾葛，另就秦之利害交迭辨述，終於獲致秦穆首肯退師。反觀蹇叔迫於情勢，知其不可為而為之，先以激動悍然姿態提出秦若襲鄭將面臨的三大難關，後以「秦害」怒斥秦穆之執意出師。惜其未能及時指出「秦利」，乃在於楬櫫「不伐喪亂」之國際公法，而最終老淚縱橫敗北收場。燭之武憑三寸不爛之舌，不費一兵一卒，成功說退秦師，對內解除鄭亡國危機，對外提升秦穆、晉文爭霸之衝突，可謂一舉兩得。因此，「說秦穆」一役，燭之武可謂大贏家。而蹇叔雖功敗垂成，然《左傳》「蹇叔哭師」中，蹇叔所樹立的「自反而縮，雖千萬人，吾往矣」（《孟子‧公孫丑章句））形象，至今已成為千古典範。故自歷史長河觀之，蹇叔並非輸家，他與燭之武皆並稱贏家。
Through the Spring and Autumn periods, Zhu Zhiwu and Jian Shu were the ministers of repute in Qin, Zheng. Before and after, both tried to lobby Qin Mu. Zuozung, “Zhu Zhiwu successfully repulsed the Qin army”, “Jian Shu cried for the Qin army” such were ingenious classical rhetoric. Trying to lobby Qin Mu, each had different backgrounds, the basic model s of rhetoric also were not the same. Zhu Zhiwu urged euphemistically tier making gradual progress, and Jian Shu push to be outspoken drastically. The main spindle of rhetoric skills included ‘touching feelings’, ‘convincing reason’ and ‘being aware of advantages and disadvantages’, but the contents both were all different. Zhu Zhiwu groveling opened the juncture of Qin Mu’s listening, then analyzed the conflict of benefits between Qin and Jin as the theorem of scales. Besides, he argued Qin Mu into gains and losses of Qin over and over, at last , he successfully repulsed the Qin army. On the contrary, Jian Shu held high his head to enrage Qin Mu, though he brought up three difficulties about raiding into Zheng, finally, he spoke of the losses about Qin and stormed at Qin Mu insisted on raiding into Zheng. It was too bad, he did not mention the law of international, when the country took place national mourning, the other country could not fight it, so Jian Shu failed in tears of old men. Zhu Zhiwu with a silver tongue, did not need to dispatch a single soldier, and successfully repulsed the Qin army. Internal relieving of Zheng the demise crisis, on the outside provoking Qin Mu and Jin Wen hegemony of conflict, could be described as killing two birds with one stone. Therefore, Zhu Zhiwu was a winner in this war. Even though Jian Shu failed, Zuozung “Jian Shu cried for the Qin army”, about loyal courtiers direct advice monarchs, he was a great pattern. Let’s see from the history river, Jian Shu was not a loser, he and Zhu Zhiwu all were the winners. |
