韓非與馬基維利(Niccolò Machiavelli)經常相提並論，本文提出際遇的概念做為比較兩人的新途徑。馬基維利稱際遇為「命」，韓非未對際遇提出普遍化的理論，但有「自然之勢」一詞，代表超越人為安排的環境力量，限定國家治亂的趨向。此外，他對治亂之資、君臣遇合的討論，也應屬於際遇的範疇。韓非與馬基維利均認為，個人的「德」是應付際遇的根本，不過韓非主張君主勞須堅守客觀的法度，不像馬基維利提倡彈性，遊走於善惡兩邊。韓非從性格上將君主分為嚴厲和懦弱的兩型，與馬基維利的相通處很高。然而，韓非將君臣遇合當做最嚴重的問題來研究，加深了君主的危機感和孤寂感。在韓非思想中重新安立際遇概念的位置後，將會改變我們對韓非的理解。我們以往以為他主張政治萬能，以及實力決定一切，而依本文的研究，應加上際遇的不可知性。人固需努力作為，但環境的助力和阻力也是普遍存在的。 Fortune, understood as circumstances in which men found themselves while the future is yet to be written, is a key to form a parallel between Han Fei and Niccolò Machiavelli, two philosophers who have often been associated and compared. Han Fei's idea of fortune partly expresses itself through the notion of ”natural authority,” referring to the congregation of all contingencies that might fundamentally affect a country beyond human influences. In addition, his discussions on the capitals of well-orderedness and disorder, and on prince-minister relations, also belong to the category of fortune.While the two philosophers apparently agree that ”virtue” is the power to cope with all circumstances, Han Fei also attributes worldly successes to the objectivity of laws and decrees, unlike Machiavelli who advocates the flexibility of crossing the line of good and evil. Han Fei's typology of imperfect princes-including the harsh punishing type and the benevolent rewarding type-is similar to Machiavelli's typology of men of action. However, Han Fei's concentration on prince-minister relations is distinctive in rendering the prince isolated and trusting no one.Putting fortune back in Han Fei's philosophy would rescue us from the dominant understanding that he believes in the omnipotence of political actions and the superiority of physical force. For him, fortune is always present; its aid and impediment to human action cannot be dismissed.