秦之“过”安在?学过《过秦论》的人都会知道:“不施仁政。”但对“仁义不施而攻守之势异”怎样理解,就有三种不同的看法: A、因不施仁政,所以由秦始皇的攻变为子婴的困守关中。 B、不施仁政使攻守之势起了变化。 C、攻守的形势变了,秦却不施仁政。分析三种看法可知:“过的总因”相同,即下施仁政;不同的是,对“仁与攻守的关系”理解各异。①“仁”作用的对象不同:A、B两种看法,“仁”对攻守而言;C的看法,“仁”只对“守”而言。②攻守确指不同:A认为,始皇攻,子婴守;B、C认为,始皇攻,始皇守。作为语文教学,本来知道“秦之过”在于“不施仁政”即可,无须一定要去深究,去无端地争执。而课后的习题一却直接涉及到对论点的理解,因此,就有弄清这一问 Those who have learned “Qin” of Qin during his study of “After Qin Theory” will all know: “Not to practice benevolence.” However, there are three different views on how to understand “the difference between offensive and defensive behaviors”. A, Because of the inaction of the government, Qin Shihuang’s attack turned into a trapped child. B. Failure to implement Renzheng has changed the offensive and defensive situation. C. The offensive and defensive situation has changed, but Qin has not applied Renzheng. Analysing the three perspectives shows that the “overall causes” are the same, that is, under the administration of Benevolence; the difference is that the understanding of the relationship between benevolence and offense is different. 1 “Benevolence” has different roles: A and B are two views; “Benevolence” is for offense and defense; C’s view is that “Benevolence” is only for “Shou”. 2 offensive and defensive means different: A believes that the emperor attacked, child infant guard; B, C believes that the emperor attacked, the beginning of the king. As a Chinese language teaching, it was originally known that “Qin’s passing” relied on “not to practice Benevolence” and there was no need to go to a deeper level and arguing unprovokedly. After class one, exercise 1 directly relates to the understanding of the argument. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify this question.