画外音:做为民间形象,曹操与诸葛亮,一个是奸诈阴险的小人,一个是纯粹正直的君子,做为历史形象,曹操与诸葛亮却不乏相似之处。比方说都生活简朴、执法严明,但在人们的心目中,曹操始终被看做是白脸的奸雄,诸葛亮始终是正义和智慧的化身,那么为什么曹操与诸葛亮的民间形象和历史形象有这么大的区别?敬请关注易中天品三国之《千古风流》。
曹操和诸葛亮是三国时代两个最重要的人物,也是后世人们谈论最多的两个人物。在很多人看来,曹操和诸葛亮不但代表着两个不同的政治集团,而且根本就不是一路人,在戏剧舞台上和文学作品中,他们是针尖对麦芒,汉贼不两立的。然而易中天先生在上一集却提出了一个惊人的观点,他认为诸葛亮很象曹操,那么易中天先生为什么这么说呢?曹操和诸葛亮到底有哪些相似之处?为什么民间形象和历史形象的曹操与诸葛亮有如此大的差别呢?厦门大学易中天教授做客百家讲坛为您精彩品三国大结局之《千古风流》。
Voice over: As folk images, Cao Cao and Zhuge Liang are both treacherous and insidious villains and a pure and upright gentleman. As historical images, Cao Cao and Zhuge Liang have many similarities. For example, they all live simple lives and enforce strict laws, but in people’s minds, Cao Cao has always been regarded as a whitefaced traitor, and Zhuge Liang has always been the embodiment of justice and wisdom. So why is there such a big difference between the folk and historical images of Cao Cao and Zhuge Liang? Please pay attention to Yi Zhongtian’s “Eternal Romance” of the Three Kingdoms.
Cao Cao and Zhuge Liang are the two most important figures in the Three Kingdoms era, and they are also the two most talked about characters in later generations. In the eyes of many people, Cao Cao and Zhuge Liang not only represent two different political groups, but also are not the same people at all. On the stage of drama and in literary works, they are antagonistic to the wheat and the Chinese thieves. However, in the previous episode, Mr. Yi Zhongtian put forward a surprising viewpoint. He believed that Zhuge Liang was very similar to Cao Cao, so why did Mr. Yi Zhongtian say so? What are the similarities between Cao Cao and Zhuge Liang? Why is there such a big difference between the folk image and the historical image of Cao Cao and Zhuge Liang? Professor Yi Zhongtian from Xiamen University is visiting hundreds of forums to give you a wonderful taste of “Eternal Romance” at the end of the Three Kingdoms Congress.
易中天:
上一集我们讲到诸葛亮,而且讲到诸葛亮和曹操的相似之处。这话很容易,引起不同的意见,因为在一般人的心目中,这是完全相反的两个人,可谓汉贼不两立,怎么会是相似呢?如果我们读的是《三国志》,而不是《三国演义》,如果我们讲的是这两个人历史形象,而不是他的文学形象和民间形象,如果我们撇开政治集团立场,撇开道德品质评价,单从政治路线看,这两个人确实有惊人的相似之处。田余庆先生在讲到曹操的法家路线,讲到曹操的法治的时候,说了这样一句话,他说三国中只有诸葛亮相可比拟,就是至少在法家路线依法治国这两条上,他两个人是一致的,而且我甚至认为诸葛亮在蜀汉执行的就是一条没有曹操的曹操路线,或者说反对曹魏的曹操路线。我们知道曹操要建立的就是一个法家寒族政权,是一个依法治国,而不是由士族地主阶级来垄断的这样一个政权,这一点诸葛亮和他是完全一样的,而且是在北方曹丕已经改变了他父亲的政治路线的时候,诸葛亮在南方,在益州还在坚持这样一条路线,这也是他最先灭亡的原因之一,我们在前面的节目里已然讲过,我们甚至会发现他们俩人的官衔都非常相似,曹操是丞相,封武平侯,命冀州牧;诸葛亮是丞相,封武襄侯,命益州牧。不同的在于什么?不同的在于曹操后来又当了魏公,后来又当了魏王,而诸葛亮没有封公,没有封王。但是并非没有这个动议,李严就曾经写信给诸葛亮要他加九锡,晋封王爵,让他称王,当然李严写这封信可能是不怀好意,也把他放到炉子上去烤一烤,问题是诸葛亮怎么回答的呢?诸葛亮先说我遭到先帝的殊遇,位极人臣,赐钱百亿,我已经非常感激了,而现在先帝的恩德还没有报效,我们的事业也还没有成功,根本不是谈加九锡,晋王爵这个问题的时候,接下来他说(画面字:若灭魏斩睿,帝还故居,与诸子并升,虽十命可受,况于九耶。):“若灭魏斩睿”就是如果我们灭了曹魏,杀了曹睿,因为那个时候曹魏的皇帝已经是曹睿了,“帝还故居”我们皇上能够回到洛阳,“与诸子并升”我和诸位一起升官,“虽十命可受,况于九耶”那个时候你不要说给我加九锡,加十锡都行,我都能接受,那这个话常常认为不可靠,在历史上已经有人认为不可靠了,这个话在什么地方出来的呢?《诸葛亮集》,是他自己的文集里面的,但是历史上还是有人不相信,说诸葛亮这个人是很谦虚的,他怎么会说这种话呢?我的看法是他怎么就不能说这个话呢,三国时期的人是有血性的,就包括刘备,包括鲁肃,这些在某些作品中被描写的没有血性的人,其实都是很有血性的,诸葛亮就不能有血性吗?何况这个话他是反将李严一军嘛,但是很多人觉得这有损丞相形象啊,这个话不能讲啊,我的看法怎么就有损了,我觉得很光辉啊,我看了这句话我觉得太过瘾了,本来就是嘛,如果真的是统一了天下,有什么不能接受的,只不过前面有一些人是接受了这些封号以后他就篡位了,我可以不篡嘛,所以老实说这两个人真是有很多相似之处。
画外音:从以上易中天先生的分析,不难看出曹操与诸葛亮确实不乏相似之处,他们的政治路线是一样的,他们打算建立的政权性质也是一样的,就连他们的生活俭朴、执法严明都很相似。那么为什么在后来的文学形象和民间形象中曹操与诸葛亮却成了两个极端,他们的文学形象和民间形象为什么差别这么大,请听易中天先生为我们陈述的四个原因。
Yi Zhongtian:
In the previous episode, we talked about Zhuge Liang and the similarities between Zhuge Liang and Cao Cao. This is easy to say and arouses different opinions, because in the minds of ordinary people, these two people are completely opposite, and it can be said that the Han and the thief are not at odds. How can they be similar? If we are reading “The Chronicles of the Three Kingdoms” instead of “The Romance of the Three Kingdoms”, if we are talking about the historical images of these two people, rather than their literary and folk images, if we set aside the position of political groups and the evaluation of moral qualities, from the perspective of political lines alone, there are indeed astonishing similarities between these two people. When talking about Cao Cao’s Legalist line and Cao Cao’s rule of law, Mr. Tian Yuqing said that there was only Zhuge Liang in the Three Kingdoms that could be compared, that is, at least in the two aspects of the Legalist line of ruling the country according to law, the two of them were consistent, and I even believe that what Zhuge Liang implemented in the Shu Han Dynasty was a Cao Cao line without Cao Cao, or the Cao Cao line against Cao Wei. “We know that what Cao Cao wanted to establish was a legalist Han regime, a regime that governed the country according to law, rather than being monopolized by the gentry and landlord class. This is exactly the same with Zhuge Liang, and it was at a time when Cao Pi had changed his father’s political path in the north, when Zhuge Liang was in the south and was still adhering to such a line in Yizhou, which was one of the reasons for his first demise.”, As we have already mentioned in the previous program, we may even find that the official titles of both of them are very similar. Cao Cao was the prime minister, granted the title of Marquis Wuping, and appointed the herdsman of Jizhou; Zhuge Liang was the prime minister, appointed the Marquis of Wuxiang, and appointed the herdsman of Yizhou. What is the difference? The difference is that Cao Cao later became the Duke of Wei and later became the King of Wei, while Zhuge Liang did not become a Duke or a King. However, it is not without this motion that Li Yan once wrote to Zhuge Liang asking him to add nine tins, confer the title of a king in the Jin Dynasty, and make him king. Of course, Li Yan may have written this letter with malice and also baked him on the stove. How did Zhuge Liang answer the question? Zhuge Liang first said that I had been given a special treatment by the former emperor, a position of supreme minister, and a gift of ten billion yuan. I have already been very grateful. However, the kindness of the former emperor has not yet been paid off, and our cause has not yet been successful. This is not the time to discuss the issue of adding Jiuxi and the King of Jin, Next, he said (Picture words: “If we exterminate Wei Shurui, the emperor will return to his former residence and rise with the sons, although ten lives can be endured, let alone nine.”): “If we exterminate Wei Shurui,” that is, if we exterminate Cao Wei and kill Cao Rui, because at that time the emperor of Cao Wei was already Cao Rui, “the emperor will return to his former residence,” and our emperor will be able to return to Luoyang, “rise with the sons,” and I will be promoted together with you, “Although ten lives are tolerable, let alone nine.” At that time, you didn’t have to say that adding nine tin to me, adding ten tin would be fine, and I could accept it. That phrase is often considered unreliable. In history, some people have considered it unreliable. Where did this phrase come from? “The Collection of Zhuge Liang” is from his own collection of essays, but there are still people in history who do not believe that Zhuge Liang is very modest. How could he say such things? In my opinion, how could he not say this? During the Three Kingdoms period, people were bloodthirsty, including Liu Bei and Lu Su. Those who were described as bloodless in some works were actually very bloodthirsty, so couldn’t Zhuge Liang have bloodthirsty? What’s more, he is a rebel general Li Yan, but many people feel that it undermines the image of the prime minister. I can’t speak of it. How can my opinion be damaged? I think it’s brilliant. I read this sentence and I think it’s too enjoyable. It’s true. If it really unifies the world, there is nothing unacceptable, but some people in the front accepted these titles and then he usurped the throne. I can avoid usurping it, So to be honest, these two people really have many similarities.
Voice over: From the above analysis by Mr. Yi Zhongtian, it is not difficult to see that there are indeed similarities between Cao Cao and Zhuge Liang. Their political lines are the same, and the nature of the regime they intend to establish is also the same. Even their simple lives and strict law enforcement are very similar. So why did Cao Cao and Zhuge Liang become two extremes in later literary and folk images, and why their literary and folk images differed so much? Please listen to the four reasons stated by Mr. Yi Zhongtian for us.