春秋 春秋 · 文 Prose
曹刿论战
Cao Gui's Discourse on War
十年春，齐师伐我。
公将战，曹刿请见。
其乡人曰：肉食者谋之，又何间焉？
刿曰：肉食者鄙，未能远谋。
乃入见。
问：何以战？
公曰：衣食所安，弗敢专也，必以分人。
对曰：小惠未遍，民弗从也。
A man of his village said: 'Those who eat meat are the ones who plan such things—why should you get involved?' Cao Gui said: 'Those who eat meat are mean of spirit; they cannot plan far ahead.' So he entered to see the duke.
The duke said: 'In the clothing and food that sustain me, I dare not keep my portion sole; I must share it with others.' Cao Gui replied: 'Such small kindness does not reach all; the people will not follow you.'
Meaning
In the spring of Duke Zhuang's tenth year, Qi invaded Lu. As the duke prepared for war, the commoner Cao Gui sought an audience and scorned the shortsightedness of the ruling elite. Asked how Lu could fight, the duke first offered that he shared his food with others; Cao Gui rejected this as a petty favor that would never reach the people. The passage, breaking off here, already fixes the root of victory in the people's hearts rather than in the ruler's gifts.
鲁庄公十年的春天，齐国军队攻打我国（鲁国）。鲁庄公将要迎战，曹刿请求拜见庄公。他的同乡人说：「当权的人自会谋划这件事，你又何必参与呢？」曹刿说：「当权的人目光短浅，不能深谋远虑。」于是入宫拜见庄公。庄公问：「凭什么去作战？」庄公说：「衣食这类养生的东西，我不敢独自占有，一定拿来分给别人。」曹刿回答说：「这种小恩小惠不能遍及百姓，百姓不会听从您的。」
Appreciation
This excerpt displays the Zuo Zhuan's hallmark of narrating war through speech rather than combat. A layered structure of question and answer moves from food to sacrifice to justice, revealing that the true basis of victory is winning the people's trust. Character is drawn entirely through dialogue, with not a word of description—a supreme achievement of classical historical prose.
【白话串讲】 左丘明写《曹刿论战》：齐国打鲁国，曹刿请见。乡人说：“肉食者谋之，又何间焉”。曹刿说：“肉食者鄙，未能远谋”。开战时他等对方“一鼓作气，再而衰，三而竭”才出击——“彼竭我盈，故克之”——他写以小胜大的智慧。 【意象与手法】以对话写战争，以「论」代「战」；三问三答层层递进，由衣食而祭品而断狱，逐步揭出「取信于民」的战争根本；详略得当、语言精炼，史家笔法微言大义。 【情感与主旨】通过曹刿与乡人、庄公的对比，写出「肉食者鄙，未能远谋」的识见与「取信于民」的民本思想，是春秋时代「以民为本」战争观的光辉体现。 【名句点睛】「肉食者鄙，未能远谋」八字，成为后世讥刺当权者无远见的千古名言。
Background
Cao Gui's Discourse on War is drawn from the Zuo Zhuan, Duke Zhuang's tenth year, recording the Battle of Changshao (684 BCE) between Lu and Qi in the early Spring and Autumn period. The Zuo Zhuan, traditionally attributed to Zuoqiu Ming, a Lu historian of the late Spring and Autumn period, is China's first extensive annalistic history, originally titled Zuo's Spring and Autumn, famed for its mastery of narrating events and speech, especially warfare, and later praised as 'the finest of narrative.' The background: before Duke Huan of Qi (Xiaobai) took the throne he fought his brother Prince Jiu for the succession; Lu had sent troops to escort Prince Jiu home, breeding resentment. Once enthroned, Duke Huan attacked Lu in the spring of the tenth year to settle the score. With Qi strong and Lu weak, the outlook was grim, yet Cao Gui, a commoner, sought the duke and defined the basis of war, enabling the weaker Lu to triumph—a famous case of the weak defeating the strong. This excerpt covers only the pre-battle debate (the full text later includes the dialogue on 'lawsuits, though I cannot examine them all, I will act with integrity' and the famous tactic of 'with the first drum, courage is spent'). Cao Gui, a Lu warrior also called Cao Mo, with his verdict 'those who eat meat are mean-spirited,' reflected the clear-eyed awareness of lower-class worthies toward the aristocratic rulers.
《曹刿论战》选自《左传·庄公十年》，记载春秋初年鲁庄公十年（公元前684年）鲁国与齐国在长勺（今山东莱芜东北）的一场战争——长勺之战。《左传》相传为春秋末年鲁国史官左丘明所作，是我国第一部叙事详备的编年体史书，原名《左氏春秋》，与《春秋》经文相配，长于记事、记言，尤以记战争著称，后世推为「叙事之最」。长勺之战的背景是：齐桓公小白即位前曾与公子纠争位，鲁国曾派兵护送公子纠回国，结下仇怨；齐桓公即位后，于庄公十年春兴兵伐鲁，以报前仇。齐强鲁弱，战前形势极为不利，曹刿以布衣之身求见庄公，论定作战之根本，终使鲁军以弱胜强、以少胜多，成为中国军事史上以弱胜强的著名战例。本文即节选战前曹刿与庄公论战的部分（全篇后文尚有「小大之狱，虽不能察，必以情」的问答与「一鼓作气」的著名战术阐述）。曹刿，鲁国武士，一作曹沫，其「肉食者鄙，未能远谋」的论断，反映了春秋时代下层贤者对贵族当权者的清醒认识。
Art
The art of this piece lies first in its unique conception of 'writing war through dialogue, substituting debate for battle.' Not a stroke is spent on the fighting itself; instead it dwells on a pre-battle exchange, leaving the battle sketchy—in this choice of emphasis the author's thesis shows: the key to victory lies not in chariots and armor but in the pre-battle 'discourse.' Structurally, the question-and-answer advances in tight, logical steps: the villager's dissuasion raises the thesis 'those who eat meat are mean-spirited'; the duke answers thrice and Cao Gui judges thrice, moving from 'sharing food' to 'sacrifice in faith' to 'judging lawsuits with integrity'—the first two rejected, finally resting on 'such small favors do not reach all,' the core verdict that the root of war is the people's hearts. The language is extremely terse yet vivid: the villager's 'why should you get involved' captures worldly indifference and incomprehension; Cao Gui's 'cannot plan far ahead' in eight characters shows his insight and confidence; the duke's 'I dare not keep my portion sole' reveals his ordinariness beneath humility. Character is painted wholly through speech—no physical description, yet figures leap from the page, the highest attainment of the Zuo Zhuan's reported speech. Note too its art of 'blank space': why Cao Gui had such insight, why the duke heeded him—the author says nothing, leaving the reader to wonder; what the historian leaves unwritten surpasses the explicit.
此篇的艺术，首在「以对话写战争、以论战代叙战」的独特构思。全文不着笔墨于战场厮杀，而专写战前的一段问答，战争本身反而略写——详略取舍之间，见出作者的主旨：战争胜负的关键不在兵车甲胄，而在战前的「论」。结构上，问答层层递进、逻辑严密：乡人劝阻引出「肉食者鄙，未能远谋」的立论；庄公三答，曹刿三评，由「衣食分人」而「祭神以信」而「断狱以情」，前两者皆被否定，最终落在「小惠未遍，民弗从也」——战之根本在民心，这是全文的核心论断。语言上极简而传神：乡人一句「又何间焉」，活画出世俗的旁观与不解；曹刿的「未能远谋」，八个字便写出其见识与自信；庄公的「衣食所安，弗敢专也，必以分人」，谦恭中见其庸常。人物性格全凭对话画出，无一字外貌描写而形象跃然纸上，这正是《左传》记言的最高成就。还须注意其「留白」之妙：曹刿何以有如此识见、庄公何以能纳其言，作者皆不置一词，留给读者悬想——史家不写之写，反胜于直说。
Allusions
'Those who eat meat' is a general term in pre-Qin texts for the ruling ministers and nobles—under ancient ritual only those above the rank of grandee might eat meat, so 'those who eat meat' stood for the high-placed. Cao Gui, a commoner, calling the rulers 'those who eat meat' and pronouncing them 'mean' was daring in the rigid hierarchy of the Spring and Autumn era, reflecting the awakening of commoners who 'though lowly dare not forget their country.' 'Such small favors do not reach all' flows from the pre-Qin ethos of the people as foundation: the Shu Jing says 'the people are the state's root; the root firm, the state peaceful,' Confucius 'govern by virtue,' Mencius 'the people are most precious, the altars next, the ruler least'—Cao Gui tying victory to 'the people's following' concretizes this min-ben thought in the military sphere, a whole era ahead of mere sacrificial religion. The object-fronted 'how shall we fight' (the interrogative 'what' placed before the preposition) is typical pre-Qin grammar, showing the archaic terseness. 'Requested an audience' and 'so entered to see' also subtly observe the Spring and Autumn ritual of 'a shi visiting his lord.' Brief as it is, the piece is a crystal of pre-Qin people-centered thought and historiographic literature.
篇中用语多承先秦文化脉络。「肉食者」是《左传》等先秦文献中对卿大夫等当权者的通称——古代礼制，大夫以上者方可食肉，故以「肉食者」代指居高位者；曹刿以布衣之身称当权者为「肉食者」，并断言其「鄙」，在等级森严的春秋时代，是极大胆的言说，也反映了「位卑未敢忘忧国」的平民觉醒。「小惠未遍，民弗从也」一句，则与先秦民本思想一脉相承：《尚书》有「民惟邦本，本固邦宁」，孔子有「为政以德」，孟子有「民为贵，社稷次之，君为轻」——曹刿把战争的胜负系于「民之从」，正是这种民本思想在军事领域的具体化，比「牺牲玉帛」的宗教祭祀观念高出整整一个时代。「何以战」的宾语前置句式（疑问代词「何」作宾语前置），是先秦汉语的典型语法，也见出语言的古拙简劲。此外，「请见」「乃入见」等语，写曹刿由「请」而「入」的进见过程，亦暗合春秋礼制中「士见君」的仪节，字字有来历。全篇虽短，却是先秦民本思想与史传文学交汇的结晶。
Commentary
Cao Gui's Discourse on War is among the most celebrated passages of the Zuo Zhuan and an important document in Chinese military thought. Since the Western Han, the Zuo Zhuan was honored as a classic; this famous excerpt has long been valued by historians and commanders. In the Ming-Qing period it opened the Guwen Guanzhi, becoming a children's classic, making 'with the first drum' and 'those who eat meat are mean' household phrases. In modern times Mao Zedong, in Problems of Strategy in China's Revolutionary War, cited the Battle of Changshao and praised its principle of 'strike when the enemy is weary,' turning the piece from a historical-literary classic into a military textbook. Scholars prize its art of 'governing complexity with simplicity' and the height of its 'win the people's trust' idea: militarily it reveals the people-factor in victory and the tactic of 'striking later'; literarily, in under two hundred characters it renders character, plot, and argument—a model of historiographic 'reported speech'; in thought, the critical spirit of 'those who eat meat are mean' and the people-centered ideal still ring true today. Transmitted for over two thousand seven hundred years, it endures for its triple value as history, literature, and thought.
《曹刿论战》是《左传》中最负盛名的篇章之一，也是中国军事思想史上的重要文献。自西汉以来，《左传》被尊为经，《曹刿论战》作为其中的名篇，历来为治史、治军者所重。明清之际，此文入选《古文观止》卷首，成为童蒙诵习的经典，「一鼓作气」「肉食者鄙」等语随之家喻户晓。近现代以来，毛泽东在《中国革命战争的战略问题》中专门引述长勺之战，称赞其「敌疲我打」的战略原则，使此篇由史学、文学经典进一步成为军事教科书式的文本。学者论此篇，多赏其「以简驭繁」的叙事艺术与「取信于民」的思想高度：在军事上，它揭示了战争胜负的民心因素与「后发制人」的战术智慧；在文学上，它以不足二百字写出人物、情节、议论俱全的战争前奏，是史传文学「记言」的典范；在思想上，「肉食者鄙」的批判精神与民本观念，即使今天读来仍振聋发聩。此篇历两千七百余年而传诵不衰，正是因其兼有史、文、思三重价值。
Prosody
Line by line
十年春，齐师伐我。公将战，曹刿请见。
In the spring of the tenth year, the host of Qi attacked us. The duke was about to give battle; Cao Gui requested an audience. — The opening twelve characters set the time, the event, the situation, and the character's entrance at once; the word 'attack' already hints the Zuo Zhuan's moral weighing of words, while 'us' marks the Lu chronicler's standpoint of shared peril and solidarity.
鲁庄公十年的春天，齐国军队攻打我国。鲁庄公将要迎战，曹刿请求拜见。
In the spring of the tenth year, the Qi army attacked our state. The Duke was about to give battle when Cao Gui requested an audience.
开篇三句，十二字便交代了时间（十年春）、事件（齐师伐我）、态势（公将战）与人物出场（曹刿请见），是《左传》叙事「开门见山、言简意赅」的典范。「伐」字极有讲究：《左传》用字严于褒贬，凡师出有名曰「伐」，此字既客观记述齐军来攻，也暗含对齐国以强凌弱的批判，是「春秋笔法」一字寓褒贬的体现。「齐师伐我」的「我」，是鲁国史官的立场，三字便写出敌强我弱的危急形势与鲁国同仇敌忾的语境。而「公将战，曹刿请见」八字，主宾并出：庄公是将战的一方，曹刿是请见的贤者，「将」字与「请」字相对，一个是被动应战，一个是主动请缨，高下立判。曹刿何许人？能于国难之际自请入见，其胆识已然不凡，为后文「肉食者鄙，未能远谋」的惊人之论蓄足气势。起笔如此，全篇之「论战」已呼之欲出。
The opening states in a few characters the time (the tenth spring), the event (the Qi army invades), the posture (the Duke will fight), and the entrance of the protagonist (Cao Gui requests audience)—a model of the Chronicle's plain, unhurried narrative. The word invade is chosen for its weight: in the Spring and Autumn Annals, an attack undertaken with a stated cause is called by this term, so the verb records the aggression while quietly marking Qi as the stronger party bullying a weaker one. The word our in "our state" fixes the historian at Lu's side; three characters convey both the danger and the shared resolve. Against this, the Duke's will to fight and Cao Gui's request to be received are set side by side—will versus request, a ruler driven onto the battlefield and a commoner volunteering himself. Who is this Cao Gui? The fact that he comes forward in a national crisis already shows his mettle, and sets up the famous charge against the meat-eaters that follows.
其乡人曰：肉食者谋之，又何间焉？刿曰：肉食者鄙，未能远谋。
A man of his village said: 'Those who eat meat plan this—why should you meddle?' Cao Gui said: 'Those who eat meat are mean-spirited; they cannot plan far ahead.' — This exchange is the thesis: the villager voices worldly complaisance, Cao Gui's thunderclap verdict exposes the rulers' shortsightedness and is the very motive for his audience.
他的同乡人说：「当权的人自会谋划这件事，你又何必参与呢？」曹刿说：「当权的人目光短浅，不能深谋远虑。」
His fellow countrymen said: "Those who eat meat are managing it; what business have you to interfere?" Cao Gui replied: "Those who eat meat are shortsighted; they cannot plan far ahead."
这一段对话是全文的「破题」，短短三句，便把两种人生态度并置出来。乡人的话代表世俗常情：国家大事自有「肉食者」——那些食肉居位的卿大夫——去谋划，「又何间焉」？你一个平民，何必参与？一个「间」字（参与其间），写出乡人对「位卑」的认同与对「肉食者」的依赖，这是千百年来「不在其位，不谋其政」的普遍心态。曹刿的回答却是石破天惊：「肉食者鄙，未能远谋。」八个字，把当权者一概判为「鄙」（目光短浅、见识鄙陋），并断言其不能远谋——这既是全书立论的基石，也是曹刿求见的动机：正因为当权者不能远谋，才需要他这布衣之士挺身而出。两句对话，一俗一卓，一守一进，曹刿的自信、担当与超越流俗的识见，跃然纸上。乡人之问是「常」，曹刿之答是「变」，全文的张力从此开始。
The exchange establishes the essay's thesis by putting two attitudes face to face. The fellow countryman speaks for the world: men who eat meat—the ministers who hold office—will plan the war; what concern is yours, a commoner? The word interfere is the whole social reflex: defer to your station, trust your betters. Cao Gui's answer is explosive: those who eat meat are shortsighted and cannot plan far ahead. The eight characters condemn the entire ruling class at once, and the condemnation is also his motive—precisely because the powerful cannot see far, a commoner must step forward. One line conventional, one line daring; one line keeping to place, one line transgressing it. The village voice is the norm; Cao Gui's is the exception, and the essay's tension begins here.
公曰：衣食所安，弗敢专也，必以分人。对曰：小惠未遍，民弗从也。
The duke said: 'In clothing and food that sustain me, I dare not keep my portion sole; I must share it with others.' Cao Gui replied: 'Such small favors do not reach all; the people will not follow you.' — The first round of the three questions and answers; Cao Gui rejects the duke's petty sharing as too narrow to win the people, anchoring the whole argument in 'the people.'
鲁庄公说：「衣食这类用来安身的物品，我不敢独自占有，一定拿来分给别人。」曹刿回答说：「这种小恩小惠不能遍及百姓，百姓不会听从您的。」
The Duke said: "The food and clothing by which I am comforted, I dare not keep to myself; I always share it with others." Cao Gui answered: "Such small favors do not reach everyone; the people will not follow you for that."
这是「三问三答」的第一回合，写曹刿对庄公第一个作战理由的否定。「衣食所安，弗敢专也，必以分人」——庄公认为自己把衣食分给别人，便能得人拥护；这是他对「何以战」的朴素理解，态度谦和，却暴露其局限：他分的是「衣食」这类眼前的小利，所及的只是身边的近臣，是「小惠」。曹刿一针见血：「小惠未遍，民弗从也。」「小」对「大」、「未遍」对「必以分人」，指出这种恩惠既小且不能遍及百姓——战争要靠全体百姓的拥护，只施小惠于近旁，百姓凭什么为你卖命？此处的「民」字是全篇的关键词：曹刿衡量战争胜负的标准始终是「民」，是全体人民的支持，而不是君主的个人恩惠或神灵的保佑。一问一答，庄公之庸常、曹刿之深刻，对照分明；而全文「取信于民」的核心思想，也在这否定之中隐隐立起。
This is the first of the three questions and answers, and it tests the Duke's first reason for fighting. The Duke believes that sharing food and clothing will win him support—a decent man's simple understanding, which nonetheless exposes his limits: the comforts he distributes are small, and they reach only his courtiers. Cao Gui cuts through it: a small favor, not universal, the people will not follow. Small against great, not universal against I always share—war, he means, requires the loyalty of the whole people, and kindness shown only to those nearby will not make them die for you. The word people is the essay's key: Cao Gui judges a campaign by popular support, not by the ruler's private generosity or the gods' blessing. The Duke's ordinariness and Cao Gui's depth are set against each other, and the central doctrine—win the people's trust—rises already through this first denial.
Study
Word focus
Related Reading
Zou Ji Satirizes the King of Qi (from the Zhan Guo Ce) and Cao Gui's Discourse are both models of pre-Qin dialogue-centered historiography, each using brilliant dialogue to show a man of insight and a monarch who heeds counsel. The difference: Cao Gui presses his questions straight ('how shall we fight'), moving from food to sacrifice to lawsuits to prove victory rests in 'winning the people's trust'—a direct, frontal remonstrance; Zou Ji uses his own case ('my wife favors me, my concubine fears me, my guest wants something of me') as an analogy from household to state—an indirect, winding remonstrance. One stern, one playful; one firm, one soft—showing the rigor of the Zuo Zhuan versus the wit of the Zhan Guo Ce; both rest on 'the people' and 'listening'—Cao Gui wants the ruler to trust the people, Zou Ji wants him to open his ears—the pre-Qin political ideal of 'people as root, listening as wisdom' distilled in two short texts.
《战国策》中的《邹忌讽齐王纳谏》与《曹刿论战》同属先秦对话体史传的典范，都以精彩对话写人物的见识与君主的纳谏。区别在于：曹刿论战以「何以战」的问答层层逼问，由衣食而祭神而断狱，论证战争取胜的根本在「取信于民」，是「直言进谏」式的单刀直入；邹忌讽齐王则以「妻私我、妾畏我、客有求于我」的现身说法设喻，由家事推及国事，是「委婉讽谏」式的曲径通幽。一庄一谐、一刚一柔，恰见《左传》之严谨与《战国策》之机巧；而二文都落脚于「民」与「听」——曹刿要君主取信于民，邹忌要君主广开言路，先秦政治思想中「以民为本、以听为明」的观念，在两篇短文中得到最凝练的呈现。
得道多助，失道寡助 The Righteous Find Many Allies; the Unrighteous Few 孟子 · 同论战争胜负之根本，一记实一论理 Both argue the root of victory in war—one narrates fact, one reasons theoryMencius's 'The Righteous Find Many Allies; the Unrighteous Few'—'timing is not as good as terrain, terrain not as good as harmony among men,' 'the righteous find many allies'—and Cao Gui's Discourse both argue the root factor of victory, kindred in spirit: Cao Gui ties it to the people's hearts, Mencius to moral right and human unity. The difference: Cao Gui summarizes real experience—the weak-beating-strong fact of Changshao proves trusting the people; Mencius deduces a universal proposition through comparing timing, terrain, harmony—philosophical. One a historian's record, one a thinker's doctrine; read together they show pre-Qin military thought deepening from experience to theory, both sharing the soul of 'the people are the state's root.'
孟子《得道多助，失道寡助》「天时不如地利，地利不如人和」「得道者多助，失道者寡助」与《曹刿论战》同论战争胜负的根本因素，思想血脉相通：曹刿断言「小惠未遍，民弗从也」，把胜负系于民心；孟子断言「人和」胜于天时地利，把胜负系于道义与人心。区别在于：曹刿之论是实战经验的总结——长勺之战以弱胜强的事实印证了取信于民的作用，是「从战争中学习战争」的经验之谈；孟子之论是理论体系的推演——由天时、地利、人和的层层比较推出「得道多助」的普遍命题，是「以理论指导实践」的哲学之言。一为史家记实，一为思想家立说；二文并读，恰好呈现先秦军事思想由经验到理论的深化轨迹，其共同的灵魂，都是「民惟邦本」的民本观念。