The Art of War

[Stosh]

.

Edited January 21, 2016 by Stosh

[dust]

Well.. yeah.. we can try and put it all together to make it make sense, but it's not intended to be put together like that.

 

One version must be incorrect, and I'd suggest that it's the received. The extant version as a whole makes more sense (in Chinese or English) and translates far better into English.

 

My main problems are that:

 

- the word  餘  literally means a surplus or excess of stuff -- food, supplies, etc. It has nothing to do with strength, as Legge translates it; but if he was using an 'incorrect' version, he can't be blamed for letting the text get the better of him

 

- I have no idea why the Sonshi version is so inelegant. The English is horrible. It seems that they're working from the Hequeshan ('correct') version, but why translate in such a way? "One takes on sufficiency defending.." ?? What does that mean?

Edited August 21, 2015 by dustybeijing

[Stosh]

.

Edited January 21, 2016 by Stosh

[Michael Sternbach]

Yes, human nature being what it is we must be capable and willing to defend what we consider to be a part of our life.  I agree that there have been unnecessary wars but in the most part that is because people refuse to talk with each other and find ways to eliminate their major differences.

 

Of course, Sun Tzu talks of this often.

 

Yes. Such unresolved conflicts are typically sooner or later being capitalized on by a power-hungry individual with some insane doctrine, promising the unsatisfied masses the Garden of Eden, if they but follow him. It is common for that kind of leader to even contribute to the escalation of the conflict on purpose to gain additional support from the populace.

[Stosh]

.

Edited January 21, 2016 by Stosh

[Michael Sternbach]

Doesnt that indicate the choice is war eventually or war now? If thats true, war is the only resolution of conflict. And could be seen as a blessing. Which I disagree with, but do consider it a logical progression ,as stated.

 

Yes, as long as human beings don't learn to settle their disagreements in more constructive ways, and don't understand how they are being taken advantage of by means of emotionalized propaganda (they are in fact being conditioned towards that end from childhood on), war will be inevitable.

[Stosh]

.

Edited January 21, 2016 by Stosh

[Marblehead]

Emotionalized propaganda,,,would that include patriotism?

Yes.  It includes both. 

 

We must fully understand what it is we are agreeing with.

[Michael Sternbach]

True , So youre not really at odds with Mhs prescription of working things out , you just feel that it has to really be a legit solution for it to work ,which doesnt just leave the problem to fester.

Right, we essentially agree with each other (not only) here, I would say.

 

Thats a fair attitude. I think Tt wouldve agreed too.....Emotionalized propaganda,,,would that include patriotism?

Yes, most certainly. Basically every belief that people put their faith in can be misused for manipulating them. That includes the belief in the excellency of their country - which they are moreover encouraged to identify with the excellency of their government as the country's political leadership.

Edited August 22, 2015 by Michael Sternbach

[Michael Sternbach]

 

IV. Tactical Dispositions

 

1.

Sun Tzu said: The good fighters of old first put themselves beyond the possibility of defeat, and then waited for an opportunity of defeating the enemy.

 

In other words, they focussed on increasing their own strength rather than counting on their enemy's weakness. Not least, somebody who is considered strong is less likely to get attacked.

 

2. To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself.

 

Much like in medicine, it is much better to strengthen one's immune system than to overly worry about and fight against germs. It has even be shown that children growing up in a super clean environment tend to have weak immune systems.

 

3. Thus the good fighter is able to secure himself against defeat, but cannot make certain of defeating the enemy.

 

All the more it is important that they have confidence in their own abilities.

 

4. Hence the saying: One may know how to conquer without being able to do it.

A warning of overconfidence.

 

Also: Theoretical knowledge is insufficient if one isn't able to implement it.

 

5.

Security against defeat implies defensive tactics; ability to defeat the enemy means taking the offensive.

 

Not being hit is the first objective.

 

6.

Standing on the defensive indicates insufficient strength; attacking, a superabundance of strength.

 

Once again talking about martial arts, many self defence instructors recommend taking a non-provocative and non-onimous stance when threatened. However, in those (rather rare) instances when a physical altercation cannot be deescalated, it is usually advisable to seize the initiative and surprise the opponent by striking preemptively. The one who acts first has the edge - action is  faster than reaction. Care should be taken not to appear as the aggressor in the eyes of bystanders though...

 

7. The general who is skilled in defense hides in the most secret recesses of the earth; he who is skilled in attack flashes forth from the topmost heights of heaven. Thus on the one hand we have ability to protect ourselves; on the other, a victory that is complete.

 

8. To see victory only when it is within the ken of the common herd is not the acme of excellence.

 

9. Neither is it the acme of excellence if you fight and conquer and the whole Empire says, "Well done!"

 

10. To lift an autumn hair is no sign of great strength; to see the sun and moon is no sign of sharp sight; to hear the noise of thunder is no sign of a quick ear.

 

11. What the ancients called a clever fighter is one who not only wins, but excels in winning with ease.

 

12. Hence his victories bring him neither reputation for wisdom nor credit for courage.

 

The greatest warrior is not necessarily the hero resorting to dramatic actions that gain him great popularity, but the one who acts in accordance with the Dao - unseen and irresistibly. Better yet, he dispels conflict at the outset!

 

13. He wins his battles by making no mistakes. Making no mistakes is what establishes the certainty of victory, for it means conquering an enemy that is already defeated.

 

For who wins and who loses is no accident.

 

14. Hence the skillful fighter puts himself into a position which makes defeat impossible, and does not miss the moment for defeating the enemy.

 

Again, it's preparation first, then having the flexibility to act when the circumstances are favourable.

 

15. Thus it is that in war the victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory.

 

It has already been won on the "mental plane", accessed by the general in his "temple" (see chapter 1).

 

16. The consummate leader cultivates the moral law, and strictly adheres to method and discipline; thus it is in his power to control success.

 

17. In respect of military method, we have, firstly, Measurement; secondly, Estimation of quantity; thirdly, Calculation; fourthly, Balancing of chances; fifthly, Victory.

 

18. Measurement owes its existence to Earth; Estimation of quantity to Measurement; Calculation to Estimation of quantity; Balancing of chances to Calculation; and Victory to Balancing of chances.

 

Once again, we could see all this emphasis on measurement and calculation as being at odds with the spontaneity of the Daoist sage. My best take on this is that a working balance between control and detachment is key.

 

19. A victorious army opposed to a routed one, is as a pound's weight placed in the scale against a single grain.

 

20. The onrush of a conquering force is like the bursting of pent-up waters into a chasm a thousand fathoms deep.

 

The way I read this, it's again a reference to the superior position of the one who is able to successfully seize the initiative.

 

[Marblehead]

Awareness, preparedness, and flexibility,

 

No, don't turn the other cheek.  Don't let anyone slap you in the first place.

 

Yeah, I am a defender, not an aggressor.

[Stosh]

.

Edited January 21, 2016 by Stosh

[Marblehead]

Never allow your enemy to know your true strength.

[Stosh]

.

Edited January 21, 2016 by Stosh

[dawei]

Never allow your enemy to know your true strength.

 

I'm actually quite good at ping pong.. self-taught since about 12 years old.  I always surprise chinese in china when I go there and play... many funny stories... but truth be told, I only play when I go there in the last 8 years.  It just comes back to me once the paddle is in my hand.

 

When I was at an Air Force base for a while (too many years ago), I got to meet the Army 3rd battalion champion ping pong player.   We would play all the time and I would subtlety beg him to teach me... he would refuse... but by playing I would test him.  

 

One day, I finally shared with him what I had learned while playing with him and some strategy, etc.

 

He basically said, "What you see is only what you see. When I play [competitively], the point must be over in 2-3 hits otherwise it is worthless hitting".... worthless hitting.... like he was doing with me all those months

[Michael Sternbach]

No further comments on chapter 4? Cool. Because here comes - believe it or not - chapter 5!

 

V. Energy

1. Sun Tzu said: The control of a large force is the same principle as the control of a few men: it is merely a question of dividing up their numbers.

2. Fighting with a large army under your command is nowise different from fighting with a small one: it is merely a question of instituting signs and signals.

3. To ensure that your whole host may withstand the brunt of the enemy's attack and remain unshaken-- this is effected by maneuvers direct and indirect.

4. That the impact of your army may be like a grindstone dashed against an egg--this is effected by the science of weak points and strong.

5. In all fighting, the direct method may be used for joining battle, but indirect methods will be needed in order to secure victory.

6. Indirect tactics, efficiently applied, are inexhaustible as Heaven and Earth, unending as the flow of rivers and streams; like the sun and moon, they end but to begin anew; like the four seasons, they pass away to return once more.

7. There are not more than five musical notes, yet the combinations of these five give rise to more melodies than can ever be heard.

8. There are not more than five primary colors (blue, yellow, red, white, and black), yet in combination they produce more hues than can ever been seen.

9. There are not more than five cardinal tastes (sour, acrid, salt, sweet, bitter), yet combinations of them yield more flavors than can ever be tasted.

10. In battle, there are not more than two methods of attack--the direct and the indirect; yet these two in combination give rise to an endless series of maneuvers.

11. The direct and the indirect lead on to each other in turn. It is like moving in a circle--you never come to an end. Who can exhaust the possibilities of their combination?

12. The onset of troops is like the rush of a torrent which will even roll stones along in its course.

13. The quality of decision is like the well-timed swoop of a falcon which enables it to strike and destroy its victim.

14. Therefore the good fighter will be terrible in his onset, and prompt in his decision.

15. Energy may be likened to the bending of a crossbow; decision, to the releasing of a trigger.

16. Amid the turmoil and tumult of battle, there may be seeming disorder and yet no real disorder at all; amid confusion and chaos, your array may be without head or tail, yet it will be proof against defeat.

17. Simulated disorder postulates perfect discipline, simulated fear postulates courage; simulated weakness postulates strength.

18. Hiding order beneath the cloak of disorder is simply a question of subdivision; concealing courage under a show of timidity presupposes a fund of latent energy; masking strength with weakness is to be effected by tactical dispositions.

19. Thus one who is skillful at keeping the enemy on the move maintains deceitful appearances, according to which the enemy will act. He sacrifices something, that the enemy may snatch at it.

20. By holding out baits, he keeps him on the march; then with a body of picked men he lies in wait for him.

21. The clever combatant looks to the effect of combined energy, and does not require too much from individuals. Hence his ability to pick out the right men and utilize combined energy.

22. When he utilizes combined energy, his fighting men become as it were like unto rolling logs or stones. For it is the nature of a log or stone to remain motionless on level ground, and to move when on a slope; if four-cornered, to come to a standstill, but if round-shaped, to go rolling down.

23. Thus the energy developed by good fighting men is as the momentum of a round stone rolled down a mountain thousands of feet in height. So much on the subject of energy.

 

[Marblehead]

Yeah, he mixed his energy with his tactics but that's fine.

 

Reminded me of my Army days:  There are the Regulations, the Standard Operating Procedures, and the Field Manuals.  Then we talk about this chapter.  Which course to take under the given conditions.  Do we show strength or do we deceive with a show of weakness?

 

I do like how he separated direct and indirect methods.

[Stosh]

.

Edited January 21, 2016 by Stosh

[Marblehead]

 I dont know why this is said ,

 

In all fighting, the direct method may be used for joining battle, but indirect methods will be needed in order to secure victory.

 

 I smashed an egg with a grindstone !  what indirect action is required? 

Clean up the freakin' mess!

[Stosh]

.

Edited January 21, 2016 by Stosh

[Marblehead]

Ahh, I see what you mean......., Make the CHICKEN ! clean up the egg.

One of my philosophies has always been:  The job's not finished until the mess has been cleaned up and the tools put away.

[Stosh]

.

Edited January 21, 2016 by Stosh

[Marblehead]

If I put away the grindstone the chicken may get ideas. So im thinking it may be in line with Sun to just leave it there. Good fences make good neighbors.

Perhaps. 

 

But then, if you were already good neighbors there would have been no need for good fences.

[manitou]

19.   Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.

 

 

This reminds me a lot of the not-doing of wei wu wei.  The sage appears as nebulous, unclear, muddled.  Not that that is the way the Sage (General) really is;  he just appears that way.  The whole thing is a deception.  As to my understanding of the mental planning and calculation that someone mentioned before, this too would be in accord with the Dao in a way.  If the plans are too rigid, too well planned out, perhaps there would not be enough space for adjustment to conditions.  I'm guessing that the most important thing is to let the enemy make the mistakes, from my prior reading of TAOW.  This can also be compared to a martial arts tenet wherein the most effective motion is to 'pull' the enemy through the motion rather than resisting, causing the enemy to lose balance of his own accord.

 

He just doesn't jump the gun, that's all.  He awaits on the high ground, hopefully; watching and ready.

[steve]

19.   Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.

 

 

This reminds me a lot of the not-doing of wei wu wei.  The sage appears as nebulous, unclear, muddled.  Not that that is the way the Sage (General) really is;  he just appears that way.  The whole thing is a deception.  As to my understanding of the mental planning and calculation that someone mentioned before, this too would be in accord with the Dao in a way.  If the plans are too rigid, too well planned out, perhaps there would not be enough space for adjustment to conditions.  I'm guessing that the most important thing is to let the enemy make the mistakes, from my prior reading of TAOW.  This can also be compared to a martial arts tenet wherein the most effective motion is to 'pull' the enemy through the motion rather than resisting, causing the enemy to lose balance of his own accord.

 

He just doesn't jump the gun, that's all.  He awaits on the high ground, hopefully; watching and ready.

 

I find in it an interesting approach on dealing with my own mind.