Sun Tzu - The Art of War

[devoid]

Hi Friends,

 

I always considered the works of Sun Tzu (aka Sun Wu or Sunzi) fantastic.

 

In spite of the title of this great treatise suggesting a celebration of war, I am always humbled to find that the strategies presented therein hold true for so many things in life other than war.

 

With these words, I would like to kick off a discussion of the first of thirteen chapters in The Art of War - I challenge you to join in!

 

I. Laying Plans

1. Sun Tzu said: The art of war is of vital importance to the State.
   
2. It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence it is a subject of inquiry which can on no account be neglected.
   
3. The art of war, then, is governed by five constant factors, to be taken into account in one's deliberations, when seeking to determine the conditions obtaining in the field.
   
4. These are: (1) The Moral Law; (2) Heaven; (3) Earth; (4) The Commander; (5) Method and discipline.
   
5. The Moral Law causes the people to be in complete accord with their ruler, so that they will follow him regardless of their lives, undismayed by any danger.
   
6. [5 and 6 are presented together, see above]
   
7. Heaven signifies night and day, cold and heat, times and seasons.
   
8. Earth comprises distances, great and small; danger and security; open ground and narrow passes; the chances of life and death.
   
9. The Commander stands for the virtues of wisdom, sincerely, benevolence, courage and strictness.
   
10. By method and discipline are to be understood the marshaling of the army in its proper subdivisions, the graduations of rank among the officers, the maintenance of roads by which supplies may reach the army, and the control of military expenditure.
    
11. These five heads should be familiar to every general: he who knows them will be victorious; he who knows them not will fail.
    
12. Therefore, in your deliberations, when seeking to determine the military conditions, let them be made the basis of a comparison, in this wise:--
    
13. (1) Which of the two sovereigns is imbued with the Moral law? (2) Which of the two generals has most ability? (3) With whom lie the advantages derived from Heaven and Earth? (4) On which side is discipline most rigorously enforced? (5) Which army is stronger? (6) On which side are officers and men more highly trained? (7) In which army is there the greater constancy both in reward and punishment?
    
14. By means of these seven considerations I can forecast victory or defeat.
    
15. The general that hearkens to my counsel and acts upon it, will conquer: let such a one be retained in command! The general that hearkens not to my counsel nor acts upon it, will suffer defeat:--let such a one be dismissed!
    
16. While heading the profit of my counsel, avail yourself also of any helpful circumstances over and beyond the ordinary rules.
    
17. According as circumstances are favorable, one should modify one's plans.
    
18. All warfare is based on deception.
    
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.
    
20. Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him.
    
21. If he is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him.
    
22. If your opponent is of choleric temper, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant.
    
23. If he is taking his ease, give him no rest. If his forces are united, separate them.
    
24. Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected.
    
25. These military devices, leading to victory, must not be divulged beforehand.
    
26. Now the general who wins a battle makes many calculations in his temple ere the battle is fought. The general who loses a battle makes but few calculations beforehand. Thus do many calculations lead to victory, and few calculations to defeat: how much more no calculation at all! It is by attention to this point that I can foresee who is likely to win or lose.
    

[XieJia]

Tremendous devoid; I found the subject interesting as well how ever; I think there are many wondrous things with the Chinese language with many hidden meanings and with translation into a very specific language like English; some hidden meanings can be lost through translations. I would propose that we or those that are interested to work from the actual available Chinese text as well the different translations .

 

I would like to suggest this thread to be move to 'Book Club section' or perhaps under your Personal Practice section.

[devoid]

Hi XieJia,

 

Thank you for your kind response.

 

Just like with any ancient Chinese text, so much can get lost (or found? ) in translation. It is indeed useful to study and work on different translations as well as the original text. To that end, I should probably add that I didn't choose the Lionel Giles translation over others for any particular reason - sorry for now making that clear.

 

As such, I encourage any contribution to this thread, be it resources, interpretations (your own or others).

 

Regarding where to keep the thread (discussion forum, book club, etc.) I think it may still be premature to decide what to do. Until the discussions on the Tao Te Ching matured and it received its own sub-forum, the discussions took place mainly in the discussion forum. A recent post from manitou suggested that they were having trouble getting enough traction in the discussions as they left the general discussion board. So, let's wait and see.

 

Edits: Typos.

Edited February 8, 2011 by devoid

[ben]

[XieJia]

@devoid

Thank you for your post and starting this thread.

ok, we will see you it goes. Lets try to build it from here then.

With no disrespect to Giles' translation, I do think he did a good job.

 

@Ben

I completely agree; my speculation as for people who are educated in the Warring States of China. Sun Zi could have access to the Spring and Autumn annals, The Book of Change and possibly the Book of Odes. I am not sure about the Dao De Jing though; maybe someone with a more experience in Ancient Chinese history could clarify.

 

@General

Let make a start go

from 1) to 3); I think Lionel Giles did a very good job

This is Ancient Chinese; so my prior apologies for any mistake in advance. Please feel free to correct my humble attempt.

Lets start with 5) to 8):

 

一曰道，二曰天，三曰地，四曰將，五曰法。

One is Dao(Way), Second Heaven(Tian), Third Earth (di), Fourth Commander (jiang), fifth Law (fa)

 

comment: From this I think we can already see how us Tao Bums might interpret Sun Zi's different from Giles.

 

道者，令民與上同意，可與之死，可與之生，而不畏危也。

The Way; molds subjects to be in accord with the highest idea, can give that of death, can give that of life and fear not that of danger.

 

comment: the character of the dao is used here; my other Chinese colleague said that it have been place first signifying its importances over factors. The fact that the character 生 was used again here might signify the willingness of the subject to depart from their original life (Which could be put into context of thoughts, ideologies, family, household and etc) to follow the ruler. In addition, I think that the Liege-Vassal relationship here can't be overstated. It is the same of giving up your life for a cause; I think.

 

天者，陰陽，寒暑，時制也。

The Heaven; yin and yang , cold and hot, of the system of time and opportunity.

 

Comment: I will try to avoid making a too mystical interpretation here since I don't have much insight into the Book of Change. Sun Zi used 'Heaven' or 天 to signify timing and opportunities. I will let you guys ponder a little bit here.

 

地者，遠近，險易，廣狹，死生也。

The Earth; that of far and near, the changes of the strategic/dangerous points, the broad and narrow. That of death and alive.

 

The yuan 遠 and jin 近 can be differently interpreted as well. Earth probably signifies the chosen battleground. In the more applied context, it would be the apparent conditions/situation which one choose to engage.

 

將者，智，信，仁，勇，嚴也。

The Commander; wise, to the letter(reliable), benevolent, brave, righteous.

Comment: I do think that this can be applied in many other ways.

 

法者，曲制，官道，主用也。

The Law/Method, is flexible; wherein the host and officials employs the Dao.

Comment: I took this unconventional translation from

R.L. Wing

 

凡此五者，將莫不聞，知之者勝，不知者不勝。

In sum of these five; the commander should not be unaware of. Understanding then to victory, not-understanding then no victory

Comment: IMHO, those that don't know these factors doesn't have to suffer defeat just but rather anything victory would be a blind one.

 

Blissfully yours,

XieJia

 

P.S. Anything conception of written laws can be both beneficial or harmful. For those who are too occupied already lose the 天 timing or the present that is

 

Edited: continued

Please feel free to comment on correct any of this.

Edited February 8, 2011 by XieJia

[cicida]

Thanks for the above discussion.

 

I feel the suntze art of art is magnificent. We can apply this at our workplace, hobbies or how to attain a better friendship with our loved ones. Sincere dialogue and fruitful negotiations is better than forceful conflicts. A great work especially in those days where everything depends on inner heart.

 

cicida

[XieJia]

Thanks for the above discussion.

 

I feel the suntze art of art is magnificent. We can apply this at our workplace, hobbies or how to attain a better friendship with our loved ones. Sincere dialogue and fruitful negotiations is better than forceful conflicts. A great work especially in those days where everything depends on inner heart.

 

cicida

 

Thank you cicida

 

i dont know how to reply but i felt what you mean.

[cicida]

Thank you cicida

 

i dont know how to reply but i felt what you mean.

 

 

Lol... its fine XieJia,

 

Just like crickets sing to each other and we do not understand...only the crickets understand.

 

Minds of ancient people are complicated but yet intelligent, their heart move like chess. I recently saw books being sale on SunTze for business management and even for teachers. Cant imagine the works of ancient people still relevant to tame the minds of today modern world.

 

In which areas do you wish to learn from SunTze ? Maybe you wish to share?

 

cicida

[XieJia]

Lol... its fine XieJia,

 

Just like crickets sing to each other and we do not understand...only the crickets understand.

 

Minds of ancient people are complicated but yet intelligent, their heart move like chess. I recently saw books being sale on SunTze for business management and even for teachers. Cant imagine the works of ancient people still relevant to tame the minds of today modern world.

 

In which areas do you wish to learn from SunTze ? Maybe you wish to share?

 

cicida

 

maybe animals and insect communicates much differently from us humans. I would like to feel that my dog understands me not from the content of the words but the ways it is said and that I would be able to do the same thing but I guess it's more one sided.

 

Chinese is not my strong point but I would say that the Ancients can express so much in so little words; something simple yet profound, but maybe it is because languages are not so developed and put into frame backthen much more like the ways my dog understood me through the feelings and intents. The ancients expresses through the symbols of the language; and I do think that we can get much more from any Chinese text if we have access to calligraphy.

 

I originally picked up SunZi from my parent's shelves when I was a child; not that I know anything but only knowing that 'He's a cool guy' and I wanted to be like him or cool aswell (I guessed deep down I still want some of that ). Then I would flicks through the pages reading 'Master Sun said that, Master Sun said this.' and imagining myself as a General about start a campaign.

The occurrence that leads me to SunZi's was the overwhelming references in one of my favourite novel 'Sanguo Yanyi'; with ancient figure like those of CaoCao, Zhou Yu () and Zhuge Liang. I became more interested in understanding the Art of War to understand more about Luo Guanzhong's characters.

Like people will say, SunZi's Art is much adaptable to many ways of dealing with conflicts whether wars, businesses, human resources, negotiations, relationship or even self exploration.

 

After I read SunZi the last time round, I came to think that the learning that Master SunZi was trying to convey across is not only how to deal with conflicts(not in a forceful term but more of a relationship/balance of power etc) but more importantly how we could look at these conflicts itself.

 

XieJia

[odi]

http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/articlelist_1731562935_5_1.html

 

I'd like to translate some points indirectly :

 

1,Suntzu have many many friends;

2,Suntzu dosen't like pure rule-by-law society .

3,Suntzu only admire who thoughtful men.

4,Suntzu will never talk about himself.

5,etc

[Marblehead]

I watched an one-hour documentary on Sun Tzu a while back and it was pointed out that the reason the US and its allies lost the war in Vietnam was because the North Vietnamese operated consistent with the concepts in The Art of War whereas the US and allies followed the traditional British methods.

 

And I do strongly agree that The Art of War isn't good for only military war but it is an excellent guide for living one's life in any environment.

[Mr. T]

hey all,

 

agreed that suntzu is interesting. it seems difficult to find a good translation, however...any suggestions other than the ones above?

 

more on topic, it seems telling that the description of the "heaven" side of battle is given first, followed by the earthly realms. the emphasis on tao is pretty cool, and the style is in the vein of ancient chinese works...thanks jia for your translation and comments. i would definitely like to read more!!

[XieJia]

hey all,

 

agreed that suntzu is interesting. it seems difficult to find a good translation, however...any suggestions other than the ones above?

 

more on topic, it seems telling that the description of the "heaven" side of battle is given first, followed by the earthly realms. the emphasis on tao is pretty cool, and the style is in the vein of ancient chinese works...thanks jia for your translation and comments. i would definitely like to read more!!

 

Thank you Mr T for your encouragement; I will be looking to do some more. As for English translation, I do really recommend R.L. Wing; his book is relatively thin with side by side Chinese and English translations; where I feel the reader have a more flexible way to approach the text than other translation. If you want some background history I would recommend Ralph Sawyer (get the one with the red cover) he provided some nice backgrounds (The feeling is highly academic though). Thomas Cleary also have some unconventional translation with comments from generals like Cao Cao, Wang Xi and Du Mu with a small section relating Art of War to IChing (Haven't read this though but flicked through it). And there's Victor H. Mair translation which is very easy and enjoyable to read with some good background information. So depends on your taste, there are so many translations.

 

I would highly recommend Victor H. Mair's for casual read and R.L. Wing for those who fancy abit more creativity.

 

The blogger of the link that Mr./Ms. Odi's post also provide a very commentary on Sun Zi's work but we would need to get some translators on them since they are in Chinese.

 

Well good luck Mr. T

 

@Marblehead

You might be interested, As I do think there's a lot of Daoist concept that Master Sun used in his work.

[Marblehead]

@Marblehead

You might be interested, As I do think there's a lot of Daoist concept that Master Sun used in his work.

 

I totally agree although I have not done the work necessary with The Art of War to make any direct connections.

 

One of the very first problems would be the time of composition.

 

The Art of War is dated to the 6th century BC. Lao Tzu, if he ever existed, is dated to the 5th century BC. That would make The Art of War older than the TTC. So this would beg the question, did one gain his inspiration from the other?

 

This would go back to a discussion Stig and I had a long time ago that Daoist thought existed for a very long time prior to the composition of the TTC as we read it today.

[Ninpo-me-this-ninjutsu-me-that]

 

I watched an one-hour documentary on Sun Tzu a while back and it was pointed out that the reason the US and its allies lost the war in Vietnam was because the North Vietnamese operated consistent with the concepts in The Art of War whereas the US and allies followed the traditional British methods.

 

 

Cheek!

 

How did you Americans follow the British model for jungle warfare?

 

It is my understanding (I may be wrong, you were there, I wasn't) that the Americans didn't follow the British military tactics commonly used in jungle warfare, which is why they made a pigs ear of it. Hearts and minds??? Where did that go?? You can't just take bits of the strategy out and still expect the whole to work.

 

My military history is shaky at best Marblehead, but I can't remember reading about a jungle campaign that went particularly bad for the British (over the long term). Or a desert campaign for that matter either. Or at least, not many.

 

Britain had the largest empire in the history of the world, covering a staggering diversity of terrains (and cultures). To be blunt, if you guys couldn't dominate and hold that, by comparison, small country for a few years, you can't blame us.... because we would have succeeded for sure.

 

In my view the American strategy of throw as many men, technology and firepower at the problem was/is always your countries military & strategic mistake.

 

Blame the British is an old American story. Come on Marbles.... we did fine for around three hundred odd years!

Edited February 11, 2011 by Ninpo-me-this-ninjutsu-me-that

[Marblehead]

Cheek!

 

How did you Americans follow the British model for jungle warfare?

 

It is my understanding (I may be wrong, you were there, I wasn't) that the Americans didn't follow the British military tactics commonly used in jungle warfare, which is why they made a pigs ear of it. Hearts and minds??? Where did that go?? You can't just take bits of the strategy out and still expect the whole to work.

 

My military history is shaky at best Marblehead, but I can't remember reading about a jungle campaign that went particularly bad for the British (over the long term). Or a desert campaign for that matter either. Or at least, not many.

 

Britain had the largest empire in the history of the world, covering a staggering diversity of terrains (and cultures). To be blunt, if you guys couldn't dominate and hold that, by comparison, small country for a few years, you can't blame us.... because we would have succeeded for sure.

 

In my view the American strategy of throw as many men, technology and firepower at the problem was/is always your countries military & strategic mistake.

 

Blame the British is an old American story. Come on Marbles.... we did fine for around three hundred odd years!

 

Ooops! I apparently did not express myself properly. Hehehe. Not the first time.

 

No, I was not putting any blame on the British or its strategies of warfare.

 

What I was referring to was the old fashioned concept of the massed frontal attack. We Americans fought the war that way, as if there was a front that, if we killed everyone in a frontal attack we would win.

 

Wrong game! No, we did not fight a war based on jungle warfare. That is the problem. We were fighting one style of warfare (massed frontal attack) and the enemy (North Vietnam) was fighting a different style (jungle warfare).

 

Only we Americans can be blamed for our errors. We made the same mistake in China following WWII. And we are making the same mistakes in Iraq and Afghanistan. Actually, I cannot think of anything the US has won when it involved jungle warfare.

 

Supposedly The Art of War is a required reading at West Point. I think everyone sleeps through all those classes.

 

Yes, the Brits were very efficient during their power era. No doubting that.

[devoid]

Hi Friends,

 

I just returned from a trip for work. I am thrilled to see that the discussion seems to be thriving and I look forward to reading up on all the posts and contributions in the weekend!

 

In the meanwhile, I also had some thoughts on discussing how to apply the philosophy of Art of War to things other than war, as I feel that (too) many people reject it on forehand - simply because of the implications of the title. I will try to provide more detail within the next few days

[manitou]

What an interesting discussion. Yes, thanks Devoid, for going to all the trouble and introducing this.

 

I remember reading this many years ago, but its essence was lost on me at that time. It looks to me now like it's the Tao Te Ching on steroids.

 

I notice the fact that all the listed qualities under Heaven are those things which actually happen 'in the heavens', or above the horizon of earth and sky. Night passes to day, the phenomenon of heat and cold occur, and this is where time lays out day after day into seasons.

 

Earth, however, contains those things which are innate to the earth. Distances, dangers and securities, and ultimately the power of life and death over us.

 

The Commander would equate to the Sage, of course. A being of wisdom, sincerity, benevolence, courage, strictness (necessarily a military quality). It seems that the Commander would have to have mastered the art of wu-wei to have at his disposal all the options between doing and not-doing; when to stay, when to move; to not rule from a place of ego, but a place of compassion.

 

An exquisite thread.

[Marblehead]

... the Tao Te Ching on steroids.

 

Hehehe.

[Mr. T]

yeah, that is pretty funny.

 

thanks again jia for the recommendations. i'll hafta keep my eye out. the sawyer translation is the one i have, and i do appreciate the historical perspective. lots of good character analysis and so forth. i'll definitely have to check out some other translations, as i have benefited from reading many versions of the ttc, so i think the same would apply!

 

as far as taoism in some name and form being around before the ttc, we only have to look at lao tzu's reference to the ancient masters...and to use the word ancient, they must have been old...

[Ninpo-me-this-ninjutsu-me-that]

Ooops! I apparently did not express myself properly. Hehehe. Not the first time.

 

No, I was not putting any blame on the British or its strategies of warfare.

 

What I was referring to was the old fashioned concept of the massed frontal attack. We Americans fought the war that way, as if there was a front that, if we killed everyone in a frontal attack we would win.

 

Wrong game! No, we did not fight a war based on jungle warfare. That is the problem. We were fighting one style of warfare (massed frontal attack) and the enemy (North Vietnam) was fighting a different style (jungle warfare).

 

 

Yeah, I still don't really understand why that happened. I can only assume you guys just considered the tactics you used in world war two.

 

 

Only we Americans can be blamed for our errors. We made the same mistake in China following WWII. And we are making the same mistakes in Iraq and Afghanistan. Actually, I cannot think of anything the US has won when it involved jungle warfare.

 

 

China? You mean Korea I guess? Although same difference really.

 

I was talking to a girl I know recently, and her grandfather had just that day given a speech at dinner. He told at how proud he was when he was a university student to be asked to speak to the students to encourage them to join the Korean war (Chinese students in China), apparently seven hundred signed up from his speech alone and were shipped off to the front lines. Funny thing was, he got to stay home! I think that might be called 'leading from behind'...like way behind!

 

I have come to the conclusion that by far the best job in the army is to be the recruiter!

 

So here we find ourselves again on the Sun Tzu Bin Fa thread. I believe the last one was started by either you or Ralis, that was quite some time ago mind you.

[devoid]

Many thanks for all of the contributions - I am really exited about this discussion!

 

Most of us seem to agree that this treatise is universally applicable (i.e. also to things other than war). I would like say a few more words about that and even propose an alternative title to the treatise rather than The Art of War:

 

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.

 

 

@ XieJia: I agree, the "Way" (or the "Tao") is by far the better translation in our context than the Moral Law. On a side note, from a viewpoint of modern philosophy I believe the right translation would be "Ethics". Also, many thanks for all the insight!

 

@ Marblehead: Thanks for the insight on when the treatise is thought to have come about. I agree that it would be very interesting to hear from a scholar on the dependencies / influences between this treatise and the Tao Te Ching.

 

@ Ninpo: You mentioned other threads on this topic. I did my best with searching the forum using both Google as well as TTB search functionality. If you can point me to any old discussions I would greatly appreciate it.

[XieJia]

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

 

 

@ XieJia: I agree, the "Way" (or the "Tao") is by far the better translation in our context than the Moral Law. On a side note, from a viewpoint of modern philosophy I believe the right translation would be "Ethics". Also, many thanks for all the insight!

 

 

 

兵

Modern/Seal script/Jinwen/Jiaguwen/Jianbo

Took this from the Chinese Text Project website; I do think your proposal can is actually see that the character signifying war in the title bing 兵 (soldier) in the seal scripts comes across as two hands doing/holding something.

法

Modern/Seal Script/Jianbo

 

Put this one down because I think it is nice aswell; the fa 法 (law, rule) or the character signifying "Art" in the title.

To me; it like something with the river.

 

But I really do lack the ancient Chinese Language history; to really make any academically-ground comment about them; just guess that the imagery of the seal script are useful, to when the language and meaning then were not too fixed. a space to be creative.

 

edited: The alignment of the pictures; dunno why but cant get the modern script to be bigger.

Edited February 12, 2011 by XieJia

[devoid]

Hi XieJia,

 

I agree it's fun to play around with the characters and I also agree that 'bing' unmistakably refers to soldiers, military, etc. As such, if we don't want to deviate from the word war, the treatise is really the war commanders' model of strategic war fare.

 

With the proposed interpretation (rather than translation) I am simply trying to reconcile the fact that the strategy presented in the Art of War can be used in pretty much all walks of life if one will allow to deviate from the principle of war (and the word itself) and instead consider it a book on the rules of strategy for any complex challenge. That's why I proposed the interpretation rather than a one-to-one Chinese-character-to-English-word translation. Of course I fully respect and appreciate any disagreement to such a broad interpretation and I can fully understand if some would argue that it may be too far fetched.

 

Edit: I find it really interesting with the hands holding / working something theory for the bing character. Sorry I didn't comment on that in the first round, I am not much into the interpretation of characters myself - when reading through things such as this treatise I generally try to read between the lines rather than into the words

Edited February 12, 2011 by devoid

[Marblehead]

China? You mean Korea I guess? Although same difference really.

 

So here we find ourselves again on the Sun Tzu Bin Fa thread. I believe the last one was started by either you or Ralis, that was quite some time ago mind you.

 

No, I was talking about China. It was our failure in China that allowed Korea to happen.

 

 

Yes, I did try to run a thread on Sun Tzu a while back but it was just the wrong time and there was no participation.

 

This one is doing sooo much better.