devoid

Ha! And that reminded me of the Native American story about the grandfather telling his grandson that we all have a good wolf and a bad wolf inside of us constantly fighting for dominance. The grandson asks which one wins and the grandfather says "The one we feed."

Now that's a great answer.

Ditto! What a great story and so true.

I am enjoying reading this thread. Sun Tzu - The Art of War, a book I read eons ago. A good reminder to re-read it.

 

This is by David Li, a scholar of Sun Wu's writings.

When one reads the 13 chapters, one must be struck by the theme as expressed by Sun Tzu. The theme is not war but, rather, on its avoidance; the focus is not on winning by waging a war, but on winning by not engaging in a war. To that extent, Sun Wu was greatly influenced by Li Er (popularly known as Lao Tzu, Confucius's senior by some 20 years), who wrote Dao De Jing, and who expressed exactly this view in DDJ. True, many chapters beyond the first chapter in Sun Tzu's work do deal with various aspects of preparing for, and winning, a war, a defensive war. This is also the view expressed in DDJ -- fight a defensive war if one is forced to; when forced to fight, fight to win, but do not rejoice after winning; treat winning a war as undertaking a funeral.

Very nice perspective - thanks, Humbleone!

Yeah. The only thing I can think of that would be better would be if there was never a need to win.

Indeed - at least as long as we restrict ourselves interpreting the treatise to dealing with war.

I guess this is a good time for me to continue on my sub-thread theme on interpreting Sun Tzu's Art of War as the Art of Dealing with (complex) Challenges: In this way, this chapter is about the strategy of how to deal with challenges. In the subtitle of this thread I embedded a cue for my thoughts on this: I wrote: "on Engaging Ones Challenges". In this sense, I see winning as a matter of succeeding in dealing and engaging with the challenge at hand.

As an example, in the microcosmic perspective, winning oneself over is often a challenge that must dealt with in a delicate manner taking into account that it satisfies the conditions of complex challenge as suggested in the discussion of chapters 1 and 2. IMO this treatise is as great for that as it is for philosophizing on war itself.

No, this will probably separate me from many others. I do believe we are one, in reality. I think it is an illusion that we are separate at all. This is why, when the Sage (or our general in the Art of War) gets to finally know himself, then he knows everyone else as well.

 

We are all sand on the beach. The beach is the One.

 

Or, we are all rays of the same sun. We are One. To finally love myself is to finally love you.

Hi Manitou,

I don't think I share this view, but I find it interesting nonetheless

Thanks for clarifying.

And yes indeed! To win without fighting! The purest form of victory!

Yes. Winning based purely holistic understanding and strategic thinking - it doesn't get much better than this!

18. If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles.

 

It appears to me that this is the essence of daoism.

 

The way I see it, we are all One; therefore, if someone gets down to their original nature by going inside themselves and finding the uncarved wood, they are capable of seeing and knowing another, as we are all the same. We are One. I can't think of a place even in the TTC where it actually says we are all One and to know ourselves is to know others, but here it is in Sun Tzu...

 

A knowledge of human nature, which we all share, is what the Sage/general attains. If he can utilize his knowledge of human nature to fight a war, this would seem to be the desired method and virtually unbeatable.

 

P.S. - Yes, putting this up in the TTC area would be great - it's too easy to miss this down in the conversation area.

Hi Manitou,

Very nice post - I really enjoyed it!

I have just one clarifying question: When you say 'we are all one' I guess that in the taoist sense you mean that 'we all originate from the source' rather than e.g. you and I are a union of some sort (unless if borrowing / mixing with New Age ideas)?

Funny reading your post. I am both and Idealist and a Pragmatist. Sometimes that causes me confusion. Hehehe. I have oftentimes called myself a Realistic Optimist. (I imagine the ideal but know it's not going to happen.)

I know what you mean Marblehead, I guess we all have both sides in us - and occasionally they will quarrel about who is right - at the end of the day I believe there are many situations in real life where one has to compromise one for the other, no matter how much one would like to satisfy both

As such, I guess that we say the one who generally sacrifices pragmatism to idealism can be said to be righteous and have a high moral compass whereas one who constantly satisfies ideology for pragmatism can be said to be opportunistic and may even be accused of being self-serving and cynical. I'll certainly admit to all of those (including the both the flattering as well as the less flattering ones )

Somehow, the old Walt Disney: Donald Duck cartoons with Donald's inner angel and inner devil (each on one shoulder) trying to tell him what to do springs to mind

there are several levels of immortals.. infinite levels actually..

 

when you get to become a level 1 immortal, you will definitely wanna progress to level 2 .. and when you are level 2, you will want to progress to level 3..

 

enlightenment is a never-ending road..

...and one can only assume that the levels are defined more or less arbitrarily by some computer game type of immortal who knows what levels are all about

Firstly, apologies to join into this discussion a bit late. Thanks to everybody all for all the great translations and comments!

It is interesting to see how the different translations can be so far apart in their conclusions on this chapter. I believe we can divide the translators into two main camps:

• Idealists
  
• Pragmatists
  

While the idealists tell the reader to be moderate in ones own pursuits and desires, the pragmatists seem to suggest that although the ideal is both easy to understand and highly desirable, it is far from reality - a kind of Utopia, if you will.

Hi Friends,

Xiejia suggested at some stage that we move these discussions somewhere else. What do you all think about requesting to have the Sun Tzu chapter discussions moved to the Tao Te Ching forum? (At first, I thought it would need it's own forum, but when reading the Tao Te Ching forum's subtitle it makes sense: "Forum to discuss classic Taoist texts such as the Tao Teh Ching, I Ching and Chuang-Tzu.")

Regardless of what we might agree to to or not, here's chapter 3:

III. Attack by Stratagem

1. Sun Tzu said: In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to recapture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy them.
   
2. Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.
   
3. Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans; the next best is to prevent the junction of the enemy's forces; the next in order is to attack the enemy's army in the field; and the worst policy of all is to besiege walled cities.
   
4. The rule is, not to besiege walled cities if it can possibly be avoided. The preparation of mantlets, movable shelters, and various implements of war, will take up three whole months; and the piling up of mounds over against the walls will take three months more.
   
5. The general, unable to control his irritation, will launch his men to the assault like swarming ants, with the result that one-third of his men are slain, while the town still remains untaken. Such are the disastrous effects of a siege.
   
6. Therefore the skillful leader subdues the enemy's troops without any fighting; he captures their cities without laying siege to them; he overthrows their kingdom without lengthy operations in the field.
   
7. With his forces intact he will dispute the mastery of the Empire, and thus, without losing a man, his triumph will be complete. This is the method of attacking by stratagem.
   
8. It is the rule in war, if our forces are ten to the enemy's one, to surround him; if five to one, to attack him; if twice as numerous, to divide our army into two.
   
9. If equally matched, we can offer battle; if slightly inferior in numbers, we can avoid the enemy; if quite unequal in every way, we can flee from him.
   
10. Hence, though an obstinate fight may be made by a small force, in the end it must be captured by the larger force.
    
11. Now the general is the bulwark of the State; if the bulwark is complete at all points; the State will be strong; if the bulwark is defective, the State will be weak.
    
12. There are three ways in which a ruler can bring misfortune upon his army:--
    
13. (1) By commanding the army to advance or to retreat, being ignorant of the fact that it cannot obey. This is called hobbling the army.
    
14. (2) By attempting to govern an army in the same way as he administers a kingdom, being ignorant of the conditions which obtain in an army. This causes restlessness in the soldier's minds.
    
15. (3) By employing the officers of his army without discrimination, through ignorance of the military principle of adaptation to circumstances. This shakes the confidence of the soldiers.
    
16. But when the army is restless and distrustful, trouble is sure to come from the other feudal princes. This is simply bringing anarchy into the army, and flinging victory away.
    
17. Thus we may know that there are five essentials for victory: (1) He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight. (2) He will win who knows how to handle both superior and inferior forces. (3) He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout all its ranks. (4) He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared. (5) He will win who has military capacity and is not interfered with by the sovereign.
    
18. Hence the saying: If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
    

Very good, Everything,

You have an excellent sense of smell. The only problem is, you don't have a clue about how to use it for anything good or enjoyable.

Your remark about lips tasting like a gun barrel makes me think that you are suicidal: bored with yourself and your situation.

Instead of asking yourself what you can do change your situation you search the net and ask questions while you think of the most recent pleasures that spring to mind related consumption or fornication.

As you said, it's time to wake up.

It's time to turn off the computer, get rid of that gun which by now is more of liability to you than a means of protection, turn off the tv and computer and go outside and experience life.

Force yourself to take a daily walk until you remember what joy and pleasure in the little things is. My guess is that your feet will get sore before you find the answer, but do persist. Buy new shoes if the old ones get too trotten - make this your daily habit and walk as much as time permits given your must-do chores.

Good luck with finding your center. You are so close to it, yet so far away from it.

Yep. Travel the main path. (Hehehe. Although I do enjoy testing the side paths now and then.)

Indeed Marblehead,

How could one possibly know that one is treading the path if one never knew the meaning of being lost?

So, my question: How do we make the sense more receptive to stimuli so that we may live more rich and vivid lifes?

Good question, Everything,

I believe the answer is focus:

• Focus on the moment
  
• Focus on each of the senses: Smells, Sounds, Taste, Texture, Touch, etc.
  

-in other words: Don't only give your senses to food an sex, Enjoy (or simply sense) the wind, the air in your nostrils, the scents of the surroundings, the feeling of being alive, your heart beating, the skin prickling, the sounds in your ears, etc.

Meditation on the senses (one at a time) can help you sharpen a sense which may have become numb to the conscious self.

Happy sensing!

 

If we replace the word 'war' with 'challenge' or 'struggle' it begins to become easy to see how this treatise can be use for other things. While the treatise is quite detailed it really sums up to telling us to look holistically at anything with which we wish to struggle in a manner which will lead to success within the given context. From this viewpoint the first chapter on planning is perhaps the most important because it lays the foundation for how one should approach and pursue challenges.

 

On these ground I would therefore like to propose an alternative, interpreted, translation for the treatise: The Way (Tao) of (dealing with) Challenges.

Sorry for quoting myself here, but I need this to provide the continuation I promised for Chapter 2:

Continuing to substitute war with challenges, this chapter tells us about the issues we can face in dealing with them: When we try to tackle too big a challenge upfront we risk running into trouble. As a result, we may not be able to deal with the challenge because we are being worn down in the long run due to fatigue setting in when the process becomes protracted. Dealing swiftly with challenges is of course most efficient, yet, when faced with the big ones, we must start working on parts of the challenges. In doing this we should make sure to celebrate the small victories along the way - especially the first ones as they boost morale. I could go on like this....

I am truly awed (although not shocked ) at how universally applicable this chapter is as well as how inspiring it is to look at challenges through the specter of Sun Tzu.

Feel free tof ask or comment if you want to discuss any of this chapter or my interpretations (also should you chose to disagree ).

Nice chapter, and nice posts Manitou and Marblehead

Indeed, humility yet IMO also temperance and moderation are important takeaways on this one. I am always stunned at how good the TTC is at painting a picture of the importance on balance on so many fronts that it eventually draws a complete and coherent picture of harmony.

Very good, Marblehead,

After careful reconsideration of this chapter, yours and other posts I am absolutely convinced that the taotology of this chapter is that it is the source of maxims. As such, chapter 23 is the one out of which spring the two, of which (again) spring the many (maxims) - here's another one:

He who posts on taobums is a taobum!

FYI -- One of Ya Mu's teacher's was an osteopath who also was trained in a rare form of Taoist medicine...

 

(in case this might be of interest to you... )

Interesting Rainbow_Vein,

I wasn't aware of that.

Thanks for letting me know

Thank you for the response.

 

When I was 16-17 is seems putting in the time to be flexible was no sweat.

 

Time and motivation were not an issue, (as an adult stretching gets boring honestly) as does practicing a musical instrument and such.

 

Obrigado,

 

Robert

Hi Robert,

Sorry it took a bit longer than expected.

In reading up on ostheopathy (which has also interested me for time) I came across Jean-Pierre Barrel and his system of visceral manipulation. I should say upfront haven't had priviledge to any of his books yet, but am considering it. His basic premise is that of an ostheopath, i.e. that the body basically knows how to repair itself, if one lets it: i.e. by removing any obstacles (tensions) that build up and prevent the natural flow. The principle of this reminds me very much of TCM, yet at the same time it is different because most osteopaths are more interested in tension / release and the use of trigger points and anatomy trains like the ones already discussed (on a side-note: a couple of other models exist than that of Myers, but this type of model). As such, my understanding is that Barrel advocates a very firm understanding of anatomy and looks at any chained / connected relationships between body parts, tensions and diseases, rather than the meridians of TCM. As part of the tension release strategy, he uses the breath of the patient (in / out) to help establish tension and release - very much like in most thought-through qigong exercises (I know many people on this site will disagree, but it is intereserting to remind ourselves that many Chinese people choose to translate qigong with 'breathing exercise').

As for the qigong set that sprang to mind I was thinking of the Muscle and Tendon Changing Qigong, i.e. the Yi Jin Jing. As such, I guess most complete sets will help out - some of my personal whole-body favorites include Ba Duan Jin: Eight-section / Brocade Qigong and Wu Qin Xi: Five Animals Qigong.

Finally, some of my own thoughts for what they're worth. I see the human body as a complex machine of many virtual layers on top of some very physical layers. Just like the computer has no browser or word processor on the hardware level, these can be programmed onto an operating system which runs on top of the hardware. Perhaps the meridians and their acupuncture / trigger points are really a result of various systems running on the bodily hardware, i.e. a kind of application programmers interface which can be used to make abstracted calls to the underlying hardware?

Sorry if this post got a bit long, but I wanted to follow up as promised.

Fair question. I will leave it for the moment with hopes that someone else will address your question. (Trying to get more people involved. Hehehe.) But I will address it in time if no one else does.

Hi Marblehead,

I think there have been many excellent replies to this post.

I am still looking forward to hearing your thoughts on this chapter, though.

But I don't want to experience any more 'shock and awe'. I had enough of that stuff during the Bush Administration in the United States of America.

[...]

Remember that Taoism is a religion and not the Tao itself.

[...]

I wish to add that to many Taoists, Taoism is a philosophy and not a religion.

Very nice - thanks for posting.

The following really struck a chord with me (from the first of the two talks you posted):

It is absolutely absurd to say that we came into this world: We didn't. We came out of it.

Edit: Typo

Thanks Marblehead,

I have questions for you on this one: What does Chapter 23 really tell us?

I'll admit that to me this one sounds more like a tautology than a taotology, but I will not be surprised if it is only because I didn't look deep enough