You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commits@ignite.apache.org by se...@apache.org on 2015/02/02 22:57:28 UTC
[45/50] [abbrv] incubator-ignite git commit: ignite-132 - pkg rename
http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator-ignite/blob/36b439d9/modules/hadoop/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/hadoop/books/art-of-war.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
diff --git a/modules/hadoop/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/hadoop/books/art-of-war.txt b/modules/hadoop/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/hadoop/books/art-of-war.txt
deleted file mode 100644
index 8efd211..0000000
--- a/modules/hadoop/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/hadoop/books/art-of-war.txt
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,6982 +0,0 @@
-The Project Gutenberg eBook, The Art of War, by Sun Tzu
-
-
-This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
-almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
-re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
-with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
-
-
-Title: The Art of War
-
-Author: Sun Tzu
-
-Translator: Lionel Giles
-
-Release Date: May 1994 [eBook #132]
-[Last updated: January 14, 2012]
-
-Language: English
-
-Character set encoding: ISO-646-US (US-ASCII)
-
-***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ART OF WAR ***
-
-Note: Please see Project Gutenberg's eBook #17405 for a version of
-this eBook without the Giles commentary (that is, with only the
-Sun Tzu text).
-
-
-
- SUN TZU ON THE ART OF WAR
-
- THE OLDEST MILITARY TREATISE IN THE WORLD
-
- Translated from the Chinese with Introduction
- and Critical Notes
-
- BY
-
- LIONEL GILES, M.A.
-
- Assistant in the Department of Oriental Printed Books and MSS.
- in the British Museum
-
- First Published in 1910
-
------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- To my brother
- Captain Valentine Giles, R.G.
- in the hope that
- a work 2400 years old
- may yet contain lessons worth consideration
- by the soldier of today
- this translation
- is affectionately dedicated.
-
------------------------------------------------------------------
-
-Preface to the Project Gutenberg Etext
---------------------------------------
-
- When Lionel Giles began his translation of Sun Tzu's ART OF
-WAR, the work was virtually unknown in Europe. Its introduction
-to Europe began in 1782 when a French Jesuit Father living in
-China, Joseph Amiot, acquired a copy of it, and translated it
-into French. It was not a good translation because, according to
-Dr. Giles, "[I]t contains a great deal that Sun Tzu did not
-write, and very little indeed of what he did."
- The first translation into English was published in 1905 in
-Tokyo by Capt. E. F. Calthrop, R.F.A. However, this translation
-is, in the words of Dr. Giles, "excessively bad." He goes
-further in this criticism: "It is not merely a question of
-downright blunders, from which none can hope to be wholly exempt.
-Omissions were frequent; hard passages were willfully distorted
-or slurred over. Such offenses are less pardonable. They would
-not be tolerated in any edition of a Latin or Greek classic, and
-a similar standard of honesty ought to be insisted upon in
-translations from Chinese." In 1908 a new edition of Capt.
-Calthrop's translation was published in London. It was an
-improvement on the first -- omissions filled up and numerous
-mistakes corrected -- but new errors were created in the process.
-Dr. Giles, in justifying his translation, wrote: "It was not
-undertaken out of any inflated estimate of my own powers; but I
-could not help feeling that Sun Tzu deserved a better fate than
-had befallen him, and I knew that, at any rate, I could hardly
-fail to improve on the work of my predecessors."
- Clearly, Dr. Giles' work established much of the groundwork
-for the work of later translators who published their own
-editions. Of the later editions of the ART OF WAR I have
-examined; two feature Giles' edited translation and notes, the
-other two present the same basic information from the ancient
-Chinese commentators found in the Giles edition. Of these four,
-Giles' 1910 edition is the most scholarly and presents the reader
-an incredible amount of information concerning Sun Tzu's text,
-much more than any other translation.
- The Giles' edition of the ART OF WAR, as stated above, was a
-scholarly work. Dr. Giles was a leading sinologue at the time
-and an assistant in the Department of Oriental Printed Books and
-Manuscripts in the British Museum. Apparently he wanted to
-produce a definitive edition, superior to anything else that
-existed and perhaps something that would become a standard
-translation. It was the best translation available for 50 years.
-But apparently there was not much interest in Sun Tzu in English-
-speaking countries since it took the start of the Second
-World War to renew interest in his work. Several people
-published unsatisfactory English translations of Sun Tzu. In
-1944, Dr. Giles' translation was edited and published in the
-United States in a series of military science books. But it
-wasn't until 1963 that a good English translation (by Samuel B.
-Griffith and still in print) was published that was an equal to
-Giles' translation. While this translation is more lucid than
-Dr. Giles' translation, it lacks his copious notes that make his
-so interesting.
- Dr. Giles produced a work primarily intended for scholars of
-the Chinese civilization and language. It contains the Chinese
-text of Sun Tzu, the English translation, and voluminous notes
-along with numerous footnotes. Unfortunately, some of his notes
-and footnotes contain Chinese characters; some are completely
-Chinese. Thus, a conversion to a Latin alphabet etext was
-difficult. I did the conversion in complete ignorance of Chinese
-(except for what I learned while doing the conversion). Thus, I
-faced the difficult task of paraphrasing it while retaining as
-much of the important text as I could. Every paraphrase
-represents a loss; thus I did what I could to retain as much of
-the text as possible. Because the 1910 text contains a Chinese
-concordance, I was able to transliterate proper names, books, and
-the like at the risk of making the text more obscure. However,
-the text, on the whole, is quite satisfactory for the casual
-reader, a transformation made possible by conversion to an etext.
-However, I come away from this task with the feeling of loss
-because I know that someone with a background in Chinese can do a
-better job than I did; any such attempt would be welcomed.
-
- Bob Sutton
- al876@cleveland.freenet.edu
- bobs@gnu.ai.mit.edu
-
------------------------------------------------------------------
-INTRODUCTION
-
-
-Sun Wu and his Book
--------------------
-
-
- Ssu-ma Ch`ien gives the following biography of Sun Tzu: [1]
---
-
- Sun Tzu Wu was a native of the Ch`i State. His ART OF
- WAR brought him to the notice of Ho Lu, [2] King of Wu. Ho
- Lu said to him: "I have carefully perused your 13 chapters.
- May I submit your theory of managing soldiers to a slight
- test?"
- Sun Tzu replied: "You may."
- Ho Lu asked: "May the test be applied to women?"
- The answer was again in the affirmative, so arrangements
- were made to bring 180 ladies out of the Palace. Sun Tzu
- divided them into two companies, and placed one of the King's
- favorite concubines at the head of each. He then bade them
- all take spears in their hands, and addressed them thus: "I
- presume you know the difference between front and back, right
- hand and left hand?"
- The girls replied: Yes.
- Sun Tzu went on: "When I say "Eyes front," you must
- look straight ahead. When I say "Left turn," you must face
- towards your left hand. When I say "Right turn," you must
- face towards your right hand. When I say "About turn," you
- must face right round towards your back."
- Again the girls assented. The words of command having
- been thus explained, he set up the halberds and battle-axes
- in order to begin the drill. Then, to the sound of drums, he
- gave the order "Right turn." But the girls only burst out
- laughing. Sun Tzu said: "If words of command are not clear
- and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly understood, then
- the general is to blame."
- So he started drilling them again, and this time gave
- the order "Left turn," whereupon the girls once more burst
- into fits of laughter. Sun Tzu: "If words of command are
- not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly
- understood, the general is to blame. But if his orders ARE
- clear, and the soldiers nevertheless disobey, then it is the
- fault of their officers."
- So saying, he ordered the leaders of the two companies
- to be beheaded. Now the king of Wu was watching the scene
- from the top of a raised pavilion; and when he saw that his
- favorite concubines were about to be executed, he was greatly
- alarmed and hurriedly sent down the following message: "We
- are now quite satisfied as to our general's ability to handle
- troops. If We are bereft of these two concubines, our meat
- and drink will lose their savor. It is our wish that they
- shall not be beheaded."
- Sun Tzu replied: "Having once received His Majesty's
- commission to be the general of his forces, there are certain
- commands of His Majesty which, acting in that capacity, I am
- unable to accept."
- Accordingly, he had the two leaders beheaded, and
- straightway installed the pair next in order as leaders in
- their place. When this had been done, the drum was sounded
- for the drill once more; and the girls went through all the
- evolutions, turning to the right or to the left, marching
- ahead or wheeling back, kneeling or standing, with perfect
- accuracy and precision, not venturing to utter a sound. Then
- Sun Tzu sent a messenger to the King saying: "Your soldiers,
- Sire, are now properly drilled and disciplined, and ready for
- your majesty's inspection. They can be put to any use that
- their sovereign may desire; bid them go through fire and
- water, and they will not disobey."
- But the King replied: "Let our general cease drilling
- and return to camp. As for us, We have no wish to come down
- and inspect the troops."
- Thereupon Sun Tzu said: "The King is only fond of
- words, and cannot translate them into deeds."
- After that, Ho Lu saw that Sun Tzu was one who knew how
- to handle an army, and finally appointed him general. In the
- west, he defeated the Ch`u State and forced his way into
- Ying, the capital; to the north he put fear into the States
- of Ch`i and Chin, and spread his fame abroad amongst the
- feudal princes. And Sun Tzu shared in the might of the King.
-
- About Sun Tzu himself this is all that Ssu-ma Ch`ien has to
-tell us in this chapter. But he proceeds to give a biography of
-his descendant, Sun Pin, born about a hundred years after his
-famous ancestor's death, and also the outstanding military genius
-of his time. The historian speaks of him too as Sun Tzu, and in
-his preface we read: "Sun Tzu had his feet cut off and yet
-continued to discuss the art of war." [3] It seems likely, then,
-that "Pin" was a nickname bestowed on him after his mutilation,
-unless the story was invented in order to account for the name.
-The crowning incident of his career, the crushing defeat of his
-treacherous rival P`ang Chuan, will be found briefly related in
-Chapter V. ss. 19, note.
- To return to the elder Sun Tzu. He is mentioned in two
-other passages of the SHIH CHI: --
-
- In the third year of his reign [512 B.C.] Ho Lu, king of
- Wu, took the field with Tzu-hsu [i.e. Wu Yuan] and Po P`ei,
- and attacked Ch`u. He captured the town of Shu and slew the
- two prince's sons who had formerly been generals of Wu. He
- was then meditating a descent on Ying [the capital]; but the
- general Sun Wu said: "The army is exhausted. It is not yet
- possible. We must wait".... [After further successful
- fighting,] "in the ninth year [506 B.C.], King Ho Lu
- addressed Wu Tzu-hsu and Sun Wu, saying: "Formerly, you
- declared that it was not yet possible for us to enter Ying.
- Is the time ripe now?" The two men replied: "Ch`u's general
- Tzu-ch`ang, [4] is grasping and covetous, and the princes of
- T`ang and Ts`ai both have a grudge against him. If Your
- Majesty has resolved to make a grand attack, you must win
- over T`ang and Ts`ai, and then you may succeed." Ho Lu
- followed this advice, [beat Ch`u in five pitched battles and
- marched into Ying.] [5]
-
- This is the latest date at which anything is recorded of Sun
-Wu. He does not appear to have survived his patron, who died
-from the effects of a wound in 496.
- In another chapter there occurs this passage: [6]
-
- From this time onward, a number of famous soldiers
- arose, one after the other: Kao-fan, [7] who was employed by
- the Chin State; Wang-tzu, [8] in the service of Ch`i; and Sun
- Wu, in the service of Wu. These men developed and threw
- light upon the principles of war.
-
- It is obvious enough that Ssu-ma Ch`ien at least had no
-doubt about the reality of Sun Wu as an historical personage; and
-with one exception, to be noticed presently, he is by far the
-most important authority on the period in question. It will not
-be necessary, therefore, to say much of such a work as the WU
-YUEH CH`UN CH`IU, which is supposed to have been written by Chao
-Yeh of the 1st century A.D. The attribution is somewhat
-doubtful; but even if it were otherwise, his account would be of
-little value, based as it is on the SHIH CHI and expanded with
-romantic details. The story of Sun Tzu will be found, for what
-it is worth, in chapter 2. The only new points in it worth
-noting are: (1) Sun Tzu was first recommended to Ho Lu by Wu
-Tzu-hsu. (2) He is called a native of Wu. (3) He had previously
-lived a retired life, and his contemporaries were unaware of his
-ability.
- The following passage occurs in the Huai-nan Tzu: "When
-sovereign and ministers show perversity of mind, it is impossible
-even for a Sun Tzu to encounter the foe." Assuming that this
-work is genuine (and hitherto no doubt has been cast upon it), we
-have here the earliest direct reference for Sun Tzu, for Huai-nan
-Tzu died in 122 B.C., many years before the SHIH CHI was given to
-the world.
- Liu Hsiang (80-9 B.C.) says: "The reason why Sun Tzu at the
-head of 30,000 men beat Ch`u with 200,000 is that the latter were
-undisciplined."
- Teng Ming-shih informs us that the surname "Sun" was
-bestowed on Sun Wu's grandfather by Duke Ching of Ch`i [547-490
-B.C.]. Sun Wu's father Sun P`ing, rose to be a Minister of State
-in Ch`i, and Sun Wu himself, whose style was Ch`ang-ch`ing, fled
-to Wu on account of the rebellion which was being fomented by the
-kindred of T`ien Pao. He had three sons, of whom the second,
-named Ming, was the father of Sun Pin. According to this account
-then, Pin was the grandson of Wu, which, considering that Sun
-Pin's victory over Wei was gained in 341 B.C., may be dismissed
-as chronological impossible. Whence these data were obtained by
-Teng Ming-shih I do not know, but of course no reliance whatever
-can be placed in them.
- An interesting document which has survived from the close of
-the Han period is the short preface written by the Great Ts`ao
-Ts`ao, or Wei Wu Ti, for his edition of Sun Tzu. I shall give it
-in full: --
-
- I have heard that the ancients used bows and arrows to
- their advantage. [10] The SHU CHU mentions "the army" among
- the "eight objects of government." The I CHING says:
- "'army' indicates firmness and justice; the experienced
- leader will have good fortune." The SHIH CHING says: "The
- King rose majestic in his wrath, and he marshaled his
- troops." The Yellow Emperor, T`ang the Completer and Wu Wang
- all used spears and battle-axes in order to succor their
- generation. The SSU-MA FA says: "If one man slay another of
- set purpose, he himself may rightfully be slain." He who
- relies solely on warlike measures shall be exterminated; he
- who relies solely on peaceful measures shall perish.
- Instances of this are Fu Ch`ai [11] on the one hand and Yen
- Wang on the other. [12] In military matters, the Sage's rule
- is normally to keep the peace, and to move his forces only
- when occasion requires. He will not use armed force unless
- driven to it by necessity.
- Many books have I read on the subject of war and
- fighting; but the work composed by Sun Wu is the profoundest
- of them all. [Sun Tzu was a native of the Ch`i state, his
- personal name was Wu. He wrote the ART OF WAR in 13 chapters
- for Ho Lu, King of Wu. Its principles were tested on women,
- and he was subsequently made a general. He led an army
- westwards, crushed the Ch`u state and entered Ying the
- capital. In the north, he kept Ch`i and Chin in awe. A
- hundred years and more after his time, Sun Pin lived. He was
- a descendant of Wu.] [13] In his treatment of deliberation
- and planning, the importance of rapidity in taking the field,
- [14] clearness of conception, and depth of design, Sun Tzu
- stands beyond the reach of carping criticism. My
- contemporaries, however, have failed to grasp the full
- meaning of his instructions, and while putting into practice
- the smaller details in which his work abounds, they have
- overlooked its essential purport. That is the motive which
- has led me to outline a rough explanation of the whole.
-
- One thing to be noticed in the above is the explicit
-statement that the 13 chapters were specially composed for King
-Ho Lu. This is supported by the internal evidence of I. ss. 15,
-in which it seems clear that some ruler is addressed.
- In the bibliographic section of the HAN SHU, there is an
-entry which has given rise to much discussion: "The works of Sun
-Tzu of Wu in 82 P`IEN (or chapters), with diagrams in 9 CHUAN."
-It is evident that this cannot be merely the 13 chapters known to
-Ssu-ma Ch`ien, or those we possess today. Chang Shou-chieh
-refers to an edition of Sun Tzu's ART OF WAR of which the "13
-chapters" formed the first CHUAN, adding that there were two
-other CHUAN besides. This has brought forth a theory, that the
-bulk of these 82 chapters consisted of other writings of Sun Tzu
--- we should call them apocryphal -- similar to the WEN TA, of
-which a specimen dealing with the Nine Situations [15] is
-preserved in the T`UNG TIEN, and another in Ho Shin's commentary.
-It is suggested that before his interview with Ho Lu, Sun Tzu had
-only written the 13 chapters, but afterwards composed a sort of
-exegesis in the form of question and answer between himself and
-the King. Pi I-hsun, the author of the SUN TZU HSU LU, backs
-this up with a quotation from the WU YUEH CH`UN CH`IU: "The King
-of Wu summoned Sun Tzu, and asked him questions about the art of
-war. Each time he set forth a chapter of his work, the King
-could not find words enough to praise him." As he points out, if
-the whole work was expounded on the same scale as in the above-
-mentioned fragments, the total number of chapters could not fail
-to be considerable. Then the numerous other treatises attributed
-to Sun Tzu might be included. The fact that the HAN CHIH
-mentions no work of Sun Tzu except the 82 P`IEN, whereas the Sui
-and T`ang bibliographies give the titles of others in addition to
-the "13 chapters," is good proof, Pi I-hsun thinks, that all of
-these were contained in the 82 P`IEN. Without pinning our faith
-to the accuracy of details supplied by the WU YUEH CH`UN CH`IU,
-or admitting the genuineness of any of the treatises cited by Pi
-I-hsun, we may see in this theory a probable solution of the
-mystery. Between Ssu-ma Ch`ien and Pan Ku there was plenty of
-time for a luxuriant crop of forgeries to have grown up under the
-magic name of Sun Tzu, and the 82 P`IEN may very well represent a
-collected edition of these lumped together with the original
-work. It is also possible, though less likely, that some of them
-existed in the time of the earlier historian and were purposely
-ignored by him. [16]
- Tu Mu's conjecture seems to be based on a passage which
-states: "Wei Wu Ti strung together Sun Wu's Art of War," which
-in turn may have resulted from a misunderstanding of the final
-words of Ts`ao King's preface. This, as Sun Hsing-yen points
-out, is only a modest way of saying that he made an explanatory
-paraphrase, or in other words, wrote a commentary on it. On the
-whole, this theory has met with very little acceptance. Thus,
-the SSU K`U CH`UAN SHU says: "The mention of the 13 chapters in
-the SHIH CHI shows that they were in existence before the HAN
-CHIH, and that latter accretions are not to be considered part of
-the original work. Tu Mu's assertion can certainly not be taken
-as proof."
- There is every reason to suppose, then, that the 13 chapters
-existed in the time of Ssu-ma Ch`ien practically as we have them
-now. That the work was then well known he tells us in so many
-words. "Sun Tzu's 13 Chapters and Wu Ch`i's Art of War are the
-two books that people commonly refer to on the subject of
-military matters. Both of them are widely distributed, so I will
-not discuss them here." But as we go further back, serious
-difficulties begin to arise. The salient fact which has to be
-faced is that the TSO CHUAN, the greatest contemporary record,
-makes no mention whatsoever of Sun Wu, either as a general or as
-a writer. It is natural, in view of this awkward circumstance,
-that many scholars should not only cast doubt on the story of Sun
-Wu as given in the SHIH CHI, but even show themselves frankly
-skeptical as to the existence of the man at all. The most
-powerful presentment of this side of the case is to be found in
-the following disposition by Yeh Shui-hsin: [17] --
-
- It is stated in Ssu-ma Ch`ien's history that Sun Wu was
- a native of the Ch`i State, and employed by Wu; and that in
- the reign of Ho Lu he crushed Ch`u, entered Ying, and was a
- great general. But in Tso's Commentary no Sun Wu appears at
- all. It is true that Tso's Commentary need not contain
- absolutely everything that other histories contain. But Tso
- has not omitted to mention vulgar plebeians and hireling
- ruffians such as Ying K`ao-shu, [18] Ts`ao Kuei, [19], Chu
- Chih-wu and Chuan She-chu [20]. In the case of Sun Wu, whose
- fame and achievements were so brilliant, the omission is much
- more glaring. Again, details are given, in their due order,
- about his contemporaries Wu Yuan and the Minister P`ei. [21]
- Is it credible that Sun Wu alone should have been passed
- over?
- In point of literary style, Sun Tzu's work belongs to
- the same school as KUAN TZU, [22] LIU T`AO, [23] and the YUEH
- YU [24] and may have been the production of some private
- scholar living towards the end of the "Spring and Autumn" or
- the beginning of the "Warring States" period. [25] The story
- that his precepts were actually applied by the Wu State, is
- merely the outcome of big talk on the part of his followers.
- From the flourishing period of the Chou dynasty [26]
- down to the time of the "Spring and Autumn," all military
- commanders were statesmen as well, and the class of
- professional generals, for conducting external campaigns, did
- not then exist. It was not until the period of the "Six
- States" [27] that this custom changed. Now although Wu was
- an uncivilized State, it is conceivable that Tso should have
- left unrecorded the fact that Sun Wu was a great general and
- yet held no civil office? What we are told, therefore, about
- Jang-chu [28] and Sun Wu, is not authentic matter, but the
- reckless fabrication of theorizing pundits. The story of Ho
- Lu's experiment on the women, in particular, is utterly
- preposterous and incredible.
-
- Yeh Shui-hsin represents Ssu-ma Ch`ien as having said that
-Sun Wu crushed Ch`u and entered Ying. This is not quite correct.
-No doubt the impression left on the reader's mind is that he at
-least shared in these exploits. The fact may or may not be
-significant; but it is nowhere explicitly stated in the SHIH CHI
-either that Sun Tzu was general on the occasion of the taking of
-Ying, or that he even went there at all. Moreover, as we know
-that Wu Yuan and Po P`ei both took part in the expedition, and
-also that its success was largely due to the dash and enterprise
-of Fu Kai, Ho Lu's younger brother, it is not easy to see how yet
-another general could have played a very prominent part in the
-same campaign.
- Ch`en Chen-sun of the Sung dynasty has the note: --
-
- Military writers look upon Sun Wu as the father of their
- art. But the fact that he does not appear in the TSO CHUAN,
- although he is said to have served under Ho Lu King of Wu,
- makes it uncertain what period he really belonged to.
-
-He also says: --
-
- The works of Sun Wu and Wu Ch`i may be of genuine
- antiquity.
-
- It is noticeable that both Yeh Shui-hsin and Ch`en Chen-sun,
-while rejecting the personality of Sun Wu as he figures in Ssu-ma
-Ch`ien's history, are inclined to accept the date traditionally
-assigned to the work which passes under his name. The author of
-the HSU LU fails to appreciate this distinction, and consequently
-his bitter attack on Ch`en Chen-sun really misses its mark. He
-makes one of two points, however, which certainly tell in favor
-of the high antiquity of our "13 chapters." "Sun Tzu," he says,
-"must have lived in the age of Ching Wang [519-476], because he
-is frequently plagiarized in subsequent works of the Chou, Ch`in
-and Han dynasties." The two most shameless offenders in this
-respect are Wu Ch`i and Huai-nan Tzu, both of them important
-historical personages in their day. The former lived only a
-century after the alleged date of Sun Tzu, and his death is known
-to have taken place in 381 B.C. It was to him, according to Liu
-Hsiang, that Tseng Shen delivered the TSO CHUAN, which had been
-entrusted to him by its author. [29] Now the fact that
-quotations from the ART OF WAR, acknowledged or otherwise, are to
-be found in so many authors of different epochs, establishes a
-very strong anterior to them all, -- in other words, that Sun
-Tzu's treatise was already in existence towards the end of the
-5th century B.C. Further proof of Sun Tzu's antiquity is
-furnished by the archaic or wholly obsolete meanings attaching to
-a number of the words he uses. A list of these, which might
-perhaps be extended, is given in the HSU LU; and though some of
-the interpretations are doubtful, the main argument is hardly
-affected thereby. Again, it must not be forgotten that Yeh Shui-
-hsin, a scholar and critic of the first rank, deliberately
-pronounces the style of the 13 chapters to belong to the early
-part of the fifth century. Seeing that he is actually engaged in
-an attempt to disprove the existence of Sun Wu himself, we may be
-sure that he would not have hesitated to assign the work to a
-later date had he not honestly believed the contrary. And it is
-precisely on such a point that the judgment of an educated
-Chinaman will carry most weight. Other internal evidence is not
-far to seek. Thus in XIII. ss. 1, there is an unmistakable
-allusion to the ancient system of land-tenure which had already
-passed away by the time of Mencius, who was anxious to see it
-revived in a modified form. [30] The only warfare Sun Tzu knows
-is that carried on between the various feudal princes, in which
-armored chariots play a large part. Their use seems to have
-entirely died out before the end of the Chou dynasty. He speaks
-as a man of Wu, a state which ceased to exist as early as 473
-B.C. On this I shall touch presently.
-
- But once refer the work to the 5th century or earlier, and
-the chances of its being other than a bona fide production are
-sensibly diminished. The great age of forgeries did not come
-until long after. That it should have been forged in the period
-immediately following 473 is particularly unlikely, for no one,
-as a rule, hastens to identify himself with a lost cause. As for
-Yeh Shui-hsin's theory, that the author was a literary recluse,
-that seems to me quite untenable. If one thing is more apparent
-than another after reading the maxims of Sun Tzu, it is that
-their essence has been distilled from a large store of personal
-observation and experience. They reflect the mind not only of a
-born strategist, gifted with a rare faculty of generalization,
-but also of a practical soldier closely acquainted with the
-military conditions of his time. To say nothing of the fact that
-these sayings have been accepted and endorsed by all the greatest
-captains of Chinese history, they offer a combination of
-freshness and sincerity, acuteness and common sense, which quite
-excludes the idea that they were artificially concocted in the
-study. If we admit, then, that the 13 chapters were the genuine
-production of a military man living towards the end of the "CH`UN
-CH`IU" period, are we not bound, in spite of the silence of the
-TSO CHUAN, to accept Ssu-ma Ch`ien's account in its entirety? In
-view of his high repute as a sober historian, must we not
-hesitate to assume that the records he drew upon for Sun Wu's
-biography were false and untrustworthy? The answer, I fear, must
-be in the negative. There is still one grave, if not fatal,
-objection to the chronology involved in the story as told in the
-SHIH CHI, which, so far as I am aware, nobody has yet pointed
-out. There are two passages in Sun Tzu in which he alludes to
-contemporary affairs. The first in in VI. ss. 21: --
-
- Though according to my estimate the soldiers of Yueh
- exceed our own in number, that shall advantage them nothing
- in the matter of victory. I say then that victory can be
- achieved.
-
-The other is in XI. ss. 30: --
-
- Asked if an army can be made to imitate the SHUAI-JAN, I
- should answer, Yes. For the men of Wu and the men of Yueh
- are enemies; yet if they are crossing a river in the same
- boat and are caught by a storm, they will come to each
- other's assistance just as the left hand helps the right.
-
- These two paragraphs are extremely valuable as evidence of
-the date of composition. They assign the work to the period of
-the struggle between Wu and Yueh. So much has been observed by
-Pi I-hsun. But what has hitherto escaped notice is that they
-also seriously impair the credibility of Ssu-ma Ch`ien's
-narrative. As we have seen above, the first positive date given
-in connection with Sun Wu is 512 B.C. He is then spoken of as a
-general, acting as confidential adviser to Ho Lu, so that his
-alleged introduction to that monarch had already taken place, and
-of course the 13 chapters must have been written earlier still.
-But at that time, and for several years after, down to the
-capture of Ying in 506, Ch`u and not Yueh, was the great
-hereditary enemy of Wu. The two states, Ch`u and Wu, had been
-constantly at war for over half a century, [31] whereas the first
-war between Wu and Yueh was waged only in 510, [32] and even then
-was no more than a short interlude sandwiched in the midst of the
-fierce struggle with Ch`u. Now Ch`u is not mentioned in the 13
-chapters at all. The natural inference is that they were written
-at a time when Yueh had become the prime antagonist of Wu, that
-is, after Ch`u had suffered the great humiliation of 506. At
-this point, a table of dates may be found useful.
-
-B.C. |
- |
-514 | Accession of Ho Lu.
-512 | Ho Lu attacks Ch`u, but is dissuaded from entering Ying,
- | the capital. SHI CHI mentions Sun Wu as general.
-511 | Another attack on Ch`u.
-510 | Wu makes a successful attack on Yueh. This is the first
- | war between the two states.
-509 |
- or | Ch`u invades Wu, but is signally defeated at Yu-chang.
-508 |
-506 | Ho Lu attacks Ch`u with the aid of T`ang and Ts`ai.
- | Decisive battle of Po-chu, and capture of Ying. Last
- | mention of Sun Wu in SHIH CHI.
-505 | Yueh makes a raid on Wu in the absence of its army. Wu
- | is beaten by Ch`in and evacuates Ying.
-504 | Ho Lu sends Fu Ch`ai to attack Ch`u.
-497 | Kou Chien becomes King of Yueh.
-496 | Wu attacks Yueh, but is defeated by Kou Chien at Tsui-li.
- | Ho Lu is killed.
-494 | Fu Ch`ai defeats Kou Chien in the great battle of Fu-
- | chaio, and enters the capital of Yueh.
-485 |
- or | Kou Chien renders homage to Wu. Death of Wu Tzu-hsu.
-484 |
-482 | Kou Chien invades Wu in the absence of Fu Ch`ai.
-478 |
- to | Further attacks by Yueh on Wu.
-476 |
-475 | Kou Chien lays siege to the capital of Wu.
-473 | Final defeat and extinction of Wu.
-
- The sentence quoted above from VI. ss. 21 hardly strikes me
-as one that could have been written in the full flush of victory.
-It seems rather to imply that, for the moment at least, the tide
-had turned against Wu, and that she was getting the worst of the
-struggle. Hence we may conclude that our treatise was not in
-existence in 505, before which date Yueh does not appear to have
-scored any notable success against Wu. Ho Lu died in 496, so
-that if the book was written for him, it must have been during
-the period 505-496, when there was a lull in the hostilities, Wu
-having presumably exhausted by its supreme effort against Ch`u.
-On the other hand, if we choose to disregard the tradition
-connecting Sun Wu's name with Ho Lu, it might equally well have
-seen the light between 496 and 494, or possibly in the period
-482-473, when Yueh was once again becoming a very serious menace.
-[33] We may feel fairly certain that the author, whoever he may
-have been, was not a man of any great eminence in his own day.
-On this point the negative testimony of the TSO CHUAN far
-outweighs any shred of authority still attaching to the SHIH CHI,
-if once its other facts are discredited. Sun Hsing-yen, however,
-makes a feeble attempt to explain the omission of his name from
-the great commentary. It was Wu Tzu-hsu, he says, who got all
-the credit of Sun Wu's exploits, because the latter (being an
-alien) was not rewarded with an office in the State.
- How then did the Sun Tzu legend originate? It may be that
-the growing celebrity of the book imparted by degrees a kind of
-factitious renown to its author. It was felt to be only right
-and proper that one so well versed in the science of war should
-have solid achievements to his credit as well. Now the capture
-of Ying was undoubtedly the greatest feat of arms in Ho Lu's
-reign; it made a deep and lasting impression on all the
-surrounding states, and raised Wu to the short-lived zenith of
-her power. Hence, what more natural, as time went on, than that
-the acknowledged master of strategy, Sun Wu, should be popularly
-identified with that campaign, at first perhaps only in the sense
-that his brain conceived and planned it; afterwards, that it was
-actually carried out by him in conjunction with Wu Yuan, [34] Po
-P`ei and Fu Kai?
- It is obvious that any attempt to reconstruct even the
-outline of Sun Tzu's life must be based almost wholly on
-conjecture. With this necessary proviso, I should say that he
-probably entered the service of Wu about the time of Ho Lu's
-accession, and gathered experience, though only in the capacity
-of a subordinate officer, during the intense military activity
-which marked the first half of the prince's reign. [35] If he
-rose to be a general at all, he certainly was never on an equal
-footing with the three above mentioned. He was doubtless present
-at the investment and occupation of Ying, and witnessed Wu's
-sudden collapse in the following year. Yueh's attack at this
-critical juncture, when her rival was embarrassed on every side,
-seems to have convinced him that this upstart kingdom was the
-great enemy against whom every effort would henceforth have to be
-directed. Sun Wu was thus a well-seasoned warrior when he sat
-down to write his famous book, which according to my reckoning
-must have appeared towards the end, rather than the beginning of
-Ho Lu's reign. The story of the women may possibly have grown
-out of some real incident occurring about the same time. As we
-hear no more of Sun Wu after this from any source, he is hardly
-likely to have survived his patron or to have taken part in the
-death-struggle with Yueh, which began with the disaster at Tsui-
-li.
- If these inferences are approximately correct, there is a
-certain irony in the fate which decreed that China's most
-illustrious man of peace should be contemporary with her greatest
-writer on war.
-
-
-The Text of Sun Tzu
--------------------
-
-
- I have found it difficult to glean much about the history of
-Sun Tzu's text. The quotations that occur in early authors go to
-show that the "13 chapters" of which Ssu-ma Ch`ien speaks were
-essentially the same as those now extant. We have his word for
-it that they were widely circulated in his day, and can only
-regret that he refrained from discussing them on that account.
-Sun Hsing-yen says in his preface: --
-
- During the Ch`in and Han dynasties Sun Tzu's ART OF WAR
- was in general use amongst military commanders, but they seem
- to have treated it as a work of mysterious import, and were
- unwilling to expound it for the benefit of posterity. Thus
- it came about that Wei Wu was the first to write a commentary
- on it.
-
- As we have already seen, there is no reasonable ground to
-suppose that Ts`ao Kung tampered with the text. But the text
-itself is often so obscure, and the number of editions which
-appeared from that time onward so great, especially during the
-T`ang and Sung dynasties, that it would be surprising if numerous
-corruptions had not managed to creep in. Towards the middle of
-the Sung period, by which time all the chief commentaries on Sun
-Tzu were in existence, a certain Chi T`ien-pao published a work
-in 15 CHUAN entitled "Sun Tzu with the collected commentaries of
-ten writers." There was another text, with variant readings put
-forward by Chu Fu of Ta-hsing, which also had supporters among
-the scholars of that period; but in the Ming editions, Sun Hsing-
-yen tells us, these readings were for some reason or other no
-longer put into circulation. Thus, until the end of the 18th
-century, the text in sole possession of the field was one derived
-from Chi T`ien-pao's edition, although no actual copy of that
-important work was known to have survived. That, therefore, is
-the text of Sun Tzu which appears in the War section of the great
-Imperial encyclopedia printed in 1726, the KU CHIN T`U SHU CHI
-CH`ENG. Another copy at my disposal of what is practically the
-same text, with slight variations, is that contained in the
-"Eleven philosophers of the Chou and Ch`in dynasties" [1758].
-And the Chinese printed in Capt. Calthrop's first edition is
-evidently a similar version which has filtered through Japanese
-channels. So things remained until Sun Hsing-yen [1752-1818], a
-distinguished antiquarian and classical scholar, who claimed to
-be an actual descendant of Sun Wu, [36] accidentally discovered a
-copy of Chi T`ien-pao's long-lost work, when on a visit to the
-library of the Hua-yin temple. [37] Appended to it was the I
-SHUO of Cheng Yu-Hsien, mentioned in the T`UNG CHIH, and also
-believed to have perished. This is what Sun Hsing-yen designates
-as the "original edition (or text)" -- a rather misleading name,
-for it cannot by any means claim to set before us the text of Sun
-Tzu in its pristine purity. Chi T`ien-pao was a careless
-compiler, and appears to have been content to reproduce the
-somewhat debased version current in his day, without troubling to
-collate it with the earliest editions then available.
-Fortunately, two versions of Sun Tzu, even older than the newly
-discovered work, were still extant, one buried in the T`UNG TIEN,
-Tu Yu's great treatise on the Constitution, the other similarly
-enshrined in the T`AI P`ING YU LAN encyclopedia. In both the
-complete text is to be found, though split up into fragments,
-intermixed with other matter, and scattered piecemeal over a
-number of different sections. Considering that the YU LAN takes
-us back to the year 983, and the T`UNG TIEN about 200 years
-further still, to the middle of the T`ang dynasty, the value of
-these early transcripts of Sun Tzu can hardly be overestimated.
-Yet the idea of utilizing them does not seem to have occurred to
-anyone until Sun Hsing-yen, acting under Government instructions,
-undertook a thorough recension of the text. This is his own
-account: --
-
- Because of the numerous mistakes in the text of Sun Tzu
- which his editors had handed down, the Government ordered
- that the ancient edition [of Chi T`ien-pao] should be used,
- and that the text should be revised and corrected throughout.
- It happened that Wu Nien-hu, the Governor Pi Kua, and Hsi, a
- graduate of the second degree, had all devoted themselves to
- this study, probably surpassing me therein. Accordingly, I
- have had the whole work cut on blocks as a textbook for
- military men.
-
- The three individuals here referred to had evidently been
-occupied on the text of Sun Tzu prior to Sun Hsing-yen's
-commission, but we are left in doubt as to the work they really
-accomplished. At any rate, the new edition, when ultimately
-produced, appeared in the names of Sun Hsing-yen and only one co-
-editor Wu Jen-shi. They took the "original edition" as their
-basis, and by careful comparison with older versions, as well as
-the extant commentaries and other sources of information such as
-the I SHUO, succeeded in restoring a very large number of
-doubtful passages, and turned out, on the whole, what must be
-accepted as the closes approximation we are ever likely to get to
-Sun Tzu's original work. This is what will hereafter be
-denominated the "standard text."
- The copy which I have used belongs to a reissue dated 1877.
-it is in 6 PEN, forming part of a well-printed set of 23 early
-philosophical works in 83 PEN. [38] It opens with a preface by
-Sun Hsing-yen (largely quoted in this introduction), vindicating
-the traditional view of Sun Tzu's life and performances, and
-summing up in remarkably concise fashion the evidence in its
-favor. This is followed by Ts`ao Kung's preface to his edition,
-and the biography of Sun Tzu from the SHIH CHI, both translated
-above. Then come, firstly, Cheng Yu-hsien's I SHUO, [39] with
-author's preface, and next, a short miscellany of historical and
-bibliographical information entitled SUN TZU HSU LU, compiled by
-Pi I-hsun. As regards the body of the work, each separate
-sentence is followed by a note on the text, if required, and then
-by the various commentaries appertaining to it, arranged in
-chronological order. These we shall now proceed to discuss
-briefly, one by one.
-
-
-The Commentators
-----------------
-
-
- Sun Tzu can boast an exceptionally long distinguished roll
-of commentators, which would do honor to any classic. Ou-yang
-Hsiu remarks on this fact, though he wrote before the tale was
-complete, and rather ingeniously explains it by saying that the
-artifices of war, being inexhaustible, must therefore be
-susceptible of treatment in a great variety of ways.
-
- 1. TS`AO TS`AO or Ts`ao Kung, afterwards known as Wei Wu Ti
-[A.D. 155-220]. There is hardly any room for doubt that the
-earliest commentary on Sun Tzu actually came from the pen of this
-extraordinary man, whose biography in the SAN KUO CHIH reads like
-a romance. One of the greatest military geniuses that the world
-has seen, and Napoleonic in the scale of his operations, he was
-especially famed for the marvelous rapidity of his marches, which
-has found expression in the line "Talk of Ts`ao Ts`ao, and Ts`ao
-Ts`ao will appear." Ou-yang Hsiu says of him that he was a great
-captain who "measured his strength against Tung Cho, Lu Pu and
-the two Yuan, father and son, and vanquished them all; whereupon
-he divided the Empire of Han with Wu and Shu, and made himself
-king. It is recorded that whenever a council of war was held by
-Wei on the eve of a far-reaching campaign, he had all his
-calculations ready; those generals who made use of them did not
-lose one battle in ten; those who ran counter to them in any
-particular saw their armies incontinently beaten and put to
-flight." Ts`ao Kung's notes on Sun Tzu, models of austere
-brevity, are so thoroughly characteristic of the stern commander
-known to history, that it is hard indeed to conceive of them as
-the work of a mere LITTERATEUR. Sometimes, indeed, owing to
-extreme compression, they are scarcely intelligible and stand no
-less in need of a commentary than the text itself. [40]
-
- 2. MENG SHIH. The commentary which has come down to us
-under this name is comparatively meager, and nothing about the
-author is known. Even his personal name has not been recorded.
-Chi T`ien-pao's edition places him after Chia Lin,and Ch`ao Kung-
-wu also assigns him to the T`ang dynasty, [41] but this is a
-mistake. In Sun Hsing-yen's preface, he appears as Meng Shih of
-the Liang dynasty [502-557]. Others would identify him with Meng
-K`ang of the 3rd century. He is named in one work as the last of
-the "Five Commentators," the others being Wei Wu Ti, Tu Mu, Ch`en
-Hao and Chia Lin.
-
- 3. LI CH`UAN of the 8th century was a well-known writer on
-military tactics. One of his works has been in constant use down
-to the present day. The T`UNG CHIH mentions "Lives of famous
-generals from the Chou to the T`ang dynasty" as written by him.
-[42] According to Ch`ao Kung-wu and the T`IEN-I-KO catalogue, he
-followed a variant of the text of Sun Tzu which differs
-considerably from those now extant. His notes are mostly short
-and to the point, and he frequently illustrates his remarks by
-anecdotes from Chinese history.
-
- 4. TU YU (died 812) did not publish a separate commentary
-on Sun Tzu, his notes being taken from the T`UNG TIEN, the
-encyclopedic treatise on the Constitution which was his life-
-work. They are largely repetitions of Ts`ao Kung and Meng Shih,
-besides which it is believed that he drew on the ancient
-commentaries of Wang Ling and others. Owing to the peculiar
-arrangement of T`UNG TIEN, he has to explain each passage on its
-merits, apart from the context, and sometimes his own explanation
-does not agree with that of Ts`ao Kung, whom he always quotes
-first. Though not strictly to be reckoned as one of the "Ten
-Commentators," he was added to their number by Chi T`ien-pao,
-being wrongly placed after his grandson Tu Mu.
-
- 5. TU MU (803-852) is perhaps the best known as a poet -- a
-bright star even in the glorious galaxy of the T`ang period. We
-learn from Ch`ao Kung-wu that although he had no practical
-experience of war, he was extremely fond of discussing the
-subject, and was moreover well read in the military history of
-the CH`UN CH`IU and CHAN KUO eras. His notes, therefore, are
-well worth attention. They are very copious, and replete with
-historical parallels. The gist of Sun Tzu's work is thus
-summarized by him: "Practice benevolence and justice, but on the
-other hand make full use of artifice and measures of expediency."
-He further declared that all the military triumphs and disasters
-of the thousand years which had elapsed since Sun Tzu's death
-would, upon examination, be found to uphold and corroborate, in
-every particular, the maxims contained in his book. Tu Mu's
-somewhat spiteful charge against Ts`ao Kung has already been
-considered elsewhere.
-
- 6. CH`EN HAO appears to have been a contemporary of Tu Mu.
-Ch`ao Kung-wu says that he was impelled to write a new commentary
-on Sun Tzu because Ts`ao Kung's on the one hand was too obscure
-and subtle, and that of Tu Mu on the other too long-winded and
-diffuse. Ou-yang Hsiu, writing in the middle of the 11th
-century, calls Ts`ao Kung, Tu Mu and Ch`en Hao the three chief
-commentators on Sun Tzu, and observes that Ch`en Hao is
-continually attacking Tu Mu's shortcomings. His commentary,
-though not lacking in merit, must rank below those of his
-predecessors.
-
- 7. CHIA LIN is known to have lived under the T`ang dynasty,
-for his commentary on Sun Tzu is mentioned in the T`ang Shu and
-was afterwards republished by Chi Hsieh of the same dynasty
-together with those of Meng Shih and Tu Yu. It is of somewhat
-scanty texture, and in point of quality, too, perhaps the least
-valuable of the eleven.
-
- 8. MEI YAO-CH`EN (1002-1060), commonly known by his "style"
-as Mei Sheng-yu, was, like Tu Mu, a poet of distinction. His
-commentary was published with a laudatory preface by the great
-Ou-yang Hsiu, from which we may cull the following: --
-
- Later scholars have misread Sun Tzu, distorting his
- words and trying to make them square with their own one-sided
- views. Thus, though commentators have not been lacking, only
- a few have proved equal to the task. My friend Sheng-yu has
- not fallen into this mistake. In attempting to provide a
- critical commentary for Sun Tzu's work, he does not lose
- sight of the fact that these sayings were intended for states
- engaged in internecine warfare; that the author is not
- concerned with the military conditions prevailing under the
- sovereigns of the three ancient dynasties, [43] nor with the
- nine punitive measures prescribed to the Minister of War.
- [44] Again, Sun Wu loved brevity of diction, but his meaning
- is always deep. Whether the subject be marching an army, or
- handling soldiers, or estimating the enemy, or controlling
- the forces of victory, it is always systematically treated;
- the sayings are bound together in strict logical sequence,
- though this has been obscured by commentators who have
- probably failed to grasp their meaning. In his own
- commentary, Mei Sheng-yu has brushed aside all the obstinate
- prejudices of these critics, and has tried to bring out the
- true meaning of Sun Tzu himself. In this way, the clouds of
- confusion have been dispersed and the sayings made clear. I
- am convinced that the present work deserves to be handed down
- side by side with the three great commentaries; and for a
- great deal that they find in the sayings, coming generations
- will have constant reason to thank my friend Sheng-yu.
-
- Making some allowance for the exuberance of friendship, I am
-inclined to endorse this favorable judgment, and would certainly
-place him above Ch`en Hao in order of merit.
-
- 9. WANG HSI, also of the Sung dynasty, is decidedly
-original in some of his interpretations, but much less judicious
-than Mei Yao-ch`en, and on the whole not a very trustworthy
-guide. He is fond of comparing his own commentary with that of
-Ts`ao Kung, but the comparison is not often flattering to him.
-We learn from Ch`ao Kung-wu that Wang Hsi revised the ancient
-text of Sun Tzu, filling up lacunae and correcting mistakes. [45]
-
- 10. HO YEN-HSI of the Sung dynasty. The personal name of
-this commentator is given as above by Cheng Ch`iao in the TUNG
-CHIH, written about the middle of the twelfth century, but he
-appears simply as Ho Shih in the YU HAI, and Ma Tuan-lin quotes
-Ch`ao Kung-wu as saying that his personal name is unknown. There
-seems to be no reason to doubt Cheng Ch`iao's statement,
-otherwise I should have been inclined to hazard a guess and
-identify him with one Ho Ch`u-fei, the author of a short treatise
-on war, who lived in the latter part of the 11th century. Ho
-Shih's commentary, in the words of the T`IEN-I-KO catalogue,
-"contains helpful additions" here and there, but is chiefly
-remarkable for the copious extracts taken, in adapted form, from
-the dynastic histories and other sources.
-
- 11. CHANG YU. The list closes with a commentator of no
-great originality perhaps, but gifted with admirable powers of
-lucid exposition. His commentator is based on that of Ts`ao
-Kung, whose terse sentences he contrives to expand and develop in
-masterly fashion. Without Chang Yu, it is safe to say that much
-of Ts`ao Kung's commentary would have remained cloaked in its
-pristine obscurity and therefore valueless. His work is not
-mentioned in the Sung history, the T`UNG K`AO, or the YU HAI, but
-it finds a niche in the T`UNG CHIH, which also names him as the
-author of the "Lives of Famous Generals." [46]
- It is rather remarkable that the last-named four should all
-have flourished within so short a space of time. Ch`ao Kung-wu
-accounts for it by saying: "During the early years of the Sung
-dynasty the Empire enjoyed a long spell of peace, and men ceased
-to practice the art of war. but when [Chao] Yuan-hao's rebellion
-came [1038-42] and the frontier generals were defeated time after
-time, the Court made strenuous inquiry for men skilled in war,
-and military topics became the vogue amongst all the high
-officials. Hence it is that the commentators of Sun Tzu in our
-dynasty belong mainly to that period. [47]
-
- Besides these eleven commentators, there are several others
-whose work has not come down to us. The SUI SHU mentions four,
-namely Wang Ling (often quoted by Tu Yu as Wang Tzu); Chang Tzu-
-shang; Chia Hsu of Wei; [48] and Shen Yu of Wu. The T`ANG SHU
-adds Sun Hao, and the T`UNG CHIH Hsiao Chi, while the T`U SHU
-mentions a Ming commentator, Huang Jun-yu. It is possible that
-some of these may have been merely collectors and editors of
-other commentaries, like Chi T`ien-pao and Chi Hsieh, mentioned
-above.
-
-
-Appreciations of Sun Tzu
-------------------------
-
-
- Sun Tzu has exercised a potent fascination over the minds of
-some of China's greatest men. Among the famous generals who are
-known to have studied his pages with enthusiasm may be mentioned
-Han Hsin (d. 196 B.C.), [49] Feng I (d. 34 A.D.), [50] Lu Meng
-(d. 219), [51] and Yo Fei (1103-1141). [52] The opinion of Ts`ao
-Kung, who disputes with Han Hsin the highest place in Chinese
-military annals, has already been recorded. [53] Still more
-remarkable, in one way, is the testimony of purely literary men,
-such as Su Hsun (the father of Su Tung-p`o), who wrote several
-essays on military topics, all of which owe their chief
-inspiration to Sun Tzu. The following short passage by him is
-preserved in the YU HAI: [54] --
-
- Sun Wu's saying, that in war one cannot make certain of
- conquering, [55] is very different indeed from what other
- books tell us. [56] Wu Ch`i was a man of the same stamp as
- Sun Wu: they both wrote books on war, and they are linked
- together in popular speech as "Sun and Wu." But Wu Ch`i's
- remarks on war are less weighty, his rules are rougher and
- more crudely stated, and there is not the same unity of plan
- as in Sun Tzu's work, where the style is terse, but the
- meaning fully brought out.
-
- The following is an extract from the "Impartial Judgments in
-the Garden of Literature" by Cheng Hou: --
-
- Sun Tzu's 13 chapters are not only the staple and base
- of all military men's training, but also compel the most
- careful attention of scholars and men of letters. His
- sayings are terse yet elegant, simple yet profound,
- perspicuous and eminently practical. Such works as the LUN
- YU, the I CHING and the great Commentary, [57] as well as the
- writings of Mencius, Hsun K`uang and Yang Chu, all fall below
- the level of Sun Tzu.
-
- Chu Hsi, commenting on this, fully admits the first part of
-the criticism, although he dislikes the audacious comparison with
-the venerated classical works. Language of this sort, he says,
-"encourages a ruler's bent towards unrelenting warfare and
-reckless militarism."
-
-
-Apologies for War
------------------
-
-
- Accustomed as we are to think of China as the greatest
-peace-loving nation on earth, we are in some danger of forgetting
-that her experience of war in all its phases has also been such
-as no modern State can parallel. Her long military annals
-stretch back to a point at which they are lost in the mists of
-time. She had built the Great Wall and was maintaining a huge
-standing army along her frontier centuries before the first Roman
-legionary was seen on the Danube. What with the perpetual
-collisions of the ancient feudal States, the grim conflicts with
-Huns, Turks and other invaders after the centralization of
-government, the terrific upheavals which accompanied the
-overthrow of so many dynasties, besides the countless rebellions
-and minor disturbances that have flamed up and flickered out
-again one by one, it is hardly too much to say that the clash of
-arms has never ceased to resound in one portion or another of the
-Empire.
- No less remarkable is the succession of illustrious captains
-to whom China can point with pride. As in all countries, the
-greatest are fond of emerging at the most fateful crises of her
-history. Thus, Po Ch`i stands out conspicuous in the period when
-Ch`in was entering upon her final struggle with the remaining
-independent states. The stormy years which followed the break-up
-of the Ch`in dynasty are illuminated by the transcendent genius
-of Han Hsin. When the House of Han in turn is tottering to its
-fall, the great and baleful figure of Ts`ao Ts`ao dominates the
-scene. And in the establishment of the T`ang dynasty,one of the
-mightiest tasks achieved by man, the superhuman energy of Li
-Shih-min (afterwards the Emperor T`ai Tsung) was seconded by the
-brilliant strategy of Li Ching. None of these generals need fear
-comparison with the greatest names in the military history of
-Europe.
- In spite of all this, the great body of Chinese sentiment,
-from Lao Tzu downwards, and especially as reflected in the
-standard literature of Confucianism, has been consistently
-pacific and intensely opposed to militarism in any form. It is
-such an uncommon thing to find any of the literati defending
-warfare on principle, that I have thought it worth while to
-collect and translate a few passages in which the unorthodox view
-is upheld. The following, by Ssu-ma Ch`ien, shows that for all
-his ardent admiration of Confucius, he was yet no advocate of
-peace at any price: --
-
- Military weapons are the means used by the Sage to
- punish violence and cruelty, to give peace to troublous
- times, to remove difficulties and dangers, and to succor
- those who are in peril. Every animal with blood in its veins
- and horns on its head will fight when it is attacked. How
- much more so will man, who carries in his breast the
- faculties of love and hatred, joy and anger! When he is
- pleased, a feeling of affection springs up within him; when
- angry, his poisoned sting is brought into play. That is the
- natural law which governs his being.... What then shall be
- said of those scholars of our time, blind to all great
- issues, and without any appreciation of relative values, who
- can only bark out their stale formulas about "virtue" and
- "civilization," condemning the use of military weapons? They
- will surely bring our country to impotence and dishonor and
- the loss of her rightful heritage; or, at the very least,
- they will bring about invasion and rebellion, sacrifice of
- territory and general enfeeblement. Yet they obstinately
- refuse to modify the position they have taken up. The truth
- is that, just as in the family the teacher must not spare the
- rod, and punishments cannot be dispensed with in the State,
- so military chastisement can never be allowed to fall into
- abeyance in the Empire. All one can say is that this power
- will be exercised wisely by some, foolishly by others, and
- that among those who bear arms some will be loyal and others
- rebellious. [58]
-
- The next piece is taken from Tu Mu's preface to his
-commentary on Sun Tzu: --
-
- War may be defined as punishment, which is one of the
- functions of government. It was the profession of Chung Yu
- and Jan Ch`iu, both disciples of Confucius. Nowadays, the
- holding of trials and hearing of litigation, the imprisonment
- of offenders and their execution by flogging in the market-
- place, are all done by officials. But the wielding of huge
- armies, the throwing down of fortified cities, the hauling of
- women and children into captivity, and the beheading of
- traitors -- this is also work which is done by officials.
- The objects of the rack and of military weapons are
- essentially the same. There is no intrinsic difference
- between the punishment of flogging and cutting off heads in
- war. For the lesser infractions of law, which are easily
- dealt with, only a small amount of force need be employed:
- hence the use of military weapons and wholesale decapitation.
- In both cases, however, the end in view is to get rid of
- wicked people, and to give comfort and relief to the good....
- Chi-sun asked Jan Yu, saying: "Have you, Sir, acquired
- your military aptitude by study, or is it innate?" Jan Yu
- replied: "It has been acquired by study." [59] "How can
- that be so," said Chi-sun, "seeing that you are a disciple of
- Confucius?" "It is a fact," replied Jan Yu; "I was taught by
- Confucius. It is fitting that the great Sage should exercise
- both civil and military functions, though to be sure my
- instruction in the art of fighting has not yet gone very
- far."
- Now, who the author was of this rigid distinction
- between the "civil" and the "military," and the limitation of
- each to a separate sphere of action, or in what year of which
- dynasty it was first introduced, is more than I can say.
- But, at any rate, it has come about that the members of the
- governing class are quite afraid of enlarging on military
- topics, or do so only in a shamefaced manner. If any are
- bold enough to discuss the subject, they are at once set down
- as eccentric individuals of coarse and brutal propensities.
- This is an extraordinary instance in which, through sheer
- lack of reasoning, men unhappily lose sight of fundamental
- principles.
- When the Duke of Chou was minister under Ch`eng Wang, he
- regulated ceremonies and made music, and venerated the arts
- of scholarship and learning; yet when the barbarians of the
- River Huai revolted, [60] he sallied forth and chastised
- them. When Confucius held office under the Duke of Lu, and a
- meeting was convened at Chia-ku, [61] he said: "If pacific
- negotiations are in progress, warlike preparations should
- have been made beforehand." He rebuked and shamed the
- Marquis of Ch`i, who cowered under him and dared not proceed
- to violence. How can it be said that these two great Sages
- had no knowledge of military matters?
-
- We have seen that the great Chu Hsi held Sun Tzu in high
-esteem. He also appeals to the authority of the Classics: --
-
- Our Master Confucius, answering Duke Ling of Wei, said:
- "I have never studied matters connected with armies and
- battalions." [62] Replying to K`ung Wen-tzu, he said: I
- have not been instructed about buff-coats and weapons." But
- if we turn to the meeting at Chia-ku, we find that he used
- armed force against the men of Lai, so that the marquis of
- Ch`i was overawed. Again, when the inhabitants of Pi
- revolted, the ordered his officers to attack them, whereupon
- they were defeated and fled in confusion. He once uttered
- the words: "If I fight, I conquer." [63] And Jan Yu also
- said: "The Sage exercises both civil and military
- functions." [64] Can it be a fact that Confucius never
- studied or received instruction in the art of war? We can
- only say that he did not specially choose matters connected
- with armies and fighting to be the subject of his teaching.
-
- Sun Hsing-yen, the editor of Sun Tzu, writes in similar
-strain: --
-
- Confucius said: "I am unversed in military matters."
- [65] He also said: "If I fight, I conquer." Confucius
- ordered ceremonies and regulated music. Now war constitutes
- one of the five classes of State ceremonial, [66] and must
- not be treated as an independent branch of study. Hence, the
- words "I am unversed in" must be taken to mean that there are
- things which even an inspired Teacher does not know. Those
- who have to lead an army and devise stratagems, must learn
- the art of war. But if one can command the services of a
- good general like Sun Tzu, who was employed by Wu Tzu-hsu,
- there is no need to learn it oneself. Hence the remark added
- by Confucius: "If I fight, I conquer."
- The men of the present day, however, willfully interpret
- these words of Confucius in their narrowest sense, as though
- he meant that books on the art of war were not worth reading.
- With blind persistency, they adduce the example of Chao Kua,
- who pored over his father's books to no purpose, [67] as a
- proof that all military theory is useless. Again, seeing
- that books on war have to do with such things as opportunism
- in designing plans, and the conversion of spies, they hold
- that the art is immoral and unworthy of a sage. These people
- ignore the fact that the studies of our scholars and the
- civil administration of our officials also require steady
- application and practice before efficiency is reached. The
- ancients were particularly chary of allowing mere novices to
- botch their work. [68] Weapons are baneful [69] and fighting
- perilous; and useless unless a general is in constant
- practice, he ought not to hazard other men's lives in battle.
- [70] Hence it is essential that Sun Tzu's 13 chapters should
- be studied.
- Hsiang Liang used to instruct his nephew Chi [71] in the
- art of war. Chi got a rough idea of the art in its general
- bearings, but would not pursue his studies to their proper
- outcome, the consequence being that he was finally defeated
- and overthrown. He did not realize that the tricks and
- artifices of war are beyond verbal computation. Duke Hsiang
- of Sung and King Yen of Hsu were brought to destruction by
- their misplaced humanity. The treacherous and underhand
- nature of war necessitates the use of guile and stratagem
- suited to the occasion. There is a case on record of
- Confucius himself having violated an extorted oath, [72] and
- also of his having left the Sung State in disguise. [73] Can
- we then recklessly arraign Sun Tzu for disregarding truth and
- honesty?
-
-
-Bibliography
-------------
-
-
- The following are the oldest Chinese treatises on war, after
-Sun Tzu. The notes on each have been drawn principally from the
-SSU K`U CH`UAN SHU CHIEN MING MU LU, ch. 9, fol. 22 sqq.
-
- 1. WU TZU, in 1 CHUAN or 6 chapters. By Wu Ch`i (d. 381
-B.C.). A genuine work. See SHIH CHI, ch. 65.
-
- 2. SSU-MA FA, in 1 CHUAN or 5 chapters. Wrongly attributed
-to Ssu-ma Jang-chu of the 6th century B.C. Its date, however,
-must be early, as the customs of the three ancient dynasties are
-constantly to be met within its pages. See SHIH CHI, ch. 64.
- The SSU K`U CH`UAN SHU (ch. 99, f. 1) remarks that the
-oldest three treatises on war, SUN TZU, WU TZU and SSU-MA FA,
-are, generally speaking, only concerned with things strictly
-military -- the art of producing, collecting, training and
-drilling troops, and the correct theory with regard to measures
-of expediency, laying plans, transport of goods and the handling
-of soldiers -- in strong contrast to later works, in which the
-science of war is usually blended with metaphysics, divination
-and magical arts in general.
-
- 3. LIU T`AO, in 6 CHUAN, or 60 chapters. Attributed to Lu
-Wang (or Lu Shang, also known as T`ai Kung) of the 12th century
-B.C. [74] But its style does not belong to the era of the Three
-Dynasties. Lu Te-ming (550-625 A.D.) mentions the work, and
-enumerates the headings of the six sections so that the forgery
-cannot have been later than Sui dynasty.
-
- 4. WEI LIAO TZU, in 5 CHUAN. Attributed to Wei Liao (4th
-cent. B.C.), who studied under the famous Kuei-ku Tzu. The work
-appears to have been originally in 31 chapters, whereas the text
-we possess contains only 24. Its matter is sound enough in the
-main, though the strategical devices differ considerably from
-those of the Warring States period. It is been furnished with a
-commentary by the well-known Sung philosopher Chang Tsai.
-
- 5. SAN LUEH, in 3 CHUAN. Attributed to Huang-shih Kung, a
-legendary personage who is said to have bestowed it on Chang
-Liang (d. 187 B.C.) in an interview on a bridge. But here again,
-the style is not that of works dating from the Ch`in or Han
-period. The Han Emperor Kuang Wu [25-57 A.D.] apparently quotes
-from it in one of his proclamations; but the passage in question
-may have been inserted later on, in order to prove the
-genuineness of the work. We shall not be far out if we refer it
-to the Northern Sung period [420-478 A.D.], or somewhat earlier.
-
- 6. LI WEI KUNG WEN TUI, in 3 sections. Written in the form
-of a dialogue between T`ai Tsung and his great general Li Ching,
-it is usually ascribed to the latter. Competent authorities
-consider it a forgery, though the author was evidently well
-versed in the art of war.
-
- 7. LI CHING PING FA (not to be confounded with the
-foregoing) is a short treatise in 8 chapters, preserved in the
-T`ung Tien, but not published separately. This fact explains its
-omission from the SSU K`U CH`UAN SHU.
-
- 8. WU CH`I CHING, in 1 CHUAN. Attributed to the legendary
-minister Feng Hou, with exegetical notes by Kung-sun Hung of the
-Han dynasty (d. 121 B.C.), and said to have been eulogized by the
-celebrated general Ma Lung (d. 300 A.D.). Yet the earliest
-mention of it is in the SUNG CHIH. Although a forgery, the work
-is well put together.
-
- Considering the high popular estimation in which Chu-ko
-Liang has always been held, it is not surprising to find more
-than one work on war ascribed to his pen. Such are (1) the SHIH
-LIU TS`E (1 CHUAN), preserved in the YUNG LO TA TIEN; (2) CHIANG
-YUAN (1 CHUAN); and (3) HSIN SHU (1 CHUAN), which steals
-wholesale from Sun Tzu. None of these has the slightest claim to
-be considered genuine.
- Most of the large Chinese encyclopedias contain extensive
-sections devoted to the literature of war. The following
-references may be found useful: --
-
- T`UNG TIEN (circa 800 A.D.), ch. 148-162.
- T`AI P`ING YU LAN (983), ch. 270-359.
- WEN HSIEN TUNG K`AO (13th cent.), ch. 221.
- YU HAI (13th cent.), ch. 140, 141.
- SAN TS`AI T`U HUI (16th cent).
- KUANG PO WU CHIH (1607), ch. 31, 32.
- CH`IEN CH`IO LEI SHU (1632), ch. 75.
- YUAN CHIEN LEI HAN (1710), ch. 206-229.
- KU CHIN T`U SHU CHI CH`ENG (1726), section XXX, esp. ch. 81-
- 90.
- HSU WEN HSIEN T`UNG K`AO (1784), ch. 121-134.
- HUANG CH`AO CHING SHIH WEN PIEN (1826), ch. 76, 77.
-
- The bibliographical sections of certain historical works
-also deserve mention: --
-
- CH`IEN HAN SHU, ch. 30.
- SUI SHU, ch. 32-35.
- CHIU T`ANG SHU, ch. 46, 47.
- HSIN T`ANG SHU, ch. 57,60.
- SUNG SHIH, ch. 202-209.
- T`UNG CHIH (circa 1150), ch. 68.
-
- To these of course must be added the great Catalogue of the
-Imperial Library: --
-
- SSU K`U CH`UAN SHU TSUNG MU T`I YAO (1790), ch. 99, 100.
-
-
-Footnotes
----------
-
-
-1. SHI CHI, ch. 65.
-
-2. He reigned from 514 to 496 B.C.
-
-3. SHI CHI, ch. 130.
-
-4. The appellation of Nang Wa.
-
-5. SHI CHI, ch. 31.
-
-6. SHI CHI, ch. 25.
-
-7. The appellation of Hu Yen, mentioned in ch. 39 under the year
-637.
-
-8. Wang-tzu Ch`eng-fu, ch. 32, year 607.
-
-9. The mistake is natural enough. Native critics refer to a
-work of the Han dynasty, which says: "Ten LI outside the WU gate
-[of the city of Wu, now Soochow in Kiangsu] there is a great
-mound, raised to commemorate the entertainment of Sun Wu of Ch`i,
-who excelled in the art of war, by the King of Wu."
-
-10. "They attached strings to wood to make bows, and sharpened
-wood to make arrows. The use of bows and arrows is to keep the
-Empire in awe."
-
-11. The son and successor of Ho Lu. He was finally defeated and
-overthrown by Kou chien, King of Yueh, in 473 B.C. See post.
-
-12. King Yen of Hsu, a fabulous being, of whom Sun Hsing-yen
-says in his preface: "His humanity brought him to destruction."
-
-13. The passage I have put in brackets is omitted in the T`U
-SHU, and may be an interpolation. It was known, however to Chang
-Shou-chieh of the T`ang dynasty, and appears in the T`AI P`ING YU
-LAN.
-
-14. Ts`ao Kung seems to be thinking of the first part of chap.
-II, perhaps especially of ss. 8.
-
-15. See chap. XI.
-
-16. On the other hand, it is noteworthy that WU TZU, which is
-not in 6 chapters, has 48 assigned to it in the HAN CHIH.
-Likewise, the CHUNG YUNG is credited with 49 chapters, though now
-only in one only. In the case of very short works, one is
-tempted to think that P`IEN might simply mean "leaves."
-
-17. Yeh Shih of the Sung dynasty [1151-1223].
-
-18. He hardly deserves to be bracketed with assassins.
-
-19. See Chapter 7, ss. 27 and Chapter 11, ss. 28.
-
-20. See Chapter 11, ss. 28. Chuan Chu is the abbreviated form
-of his name.
-
-21. I.e. Po P`ei. See ante.
-
-22. The nucleus of this work is probably genuine, though large
-additions have been made by later hands. Kuan chung died in 645
-B.C.
-
-23. See infra, beginning of INTRODUCTION.
-
-24. I do not know what this work, unless it be the last chapter
-of another work. Why that chapter should be singled out,
-however, is not clear.
-
-25. About 480 B.C.
-
-26. That is, I suppose, the age of Wu Wang and Chou Kung.
-
-27. In the 3rd century B.C.
-
-28. Ssu-ma Jang-chu, whose family name was T`ien, lived in the
-latter half of the 6th century B.C., and is also believed to have
-written a work on war. See SHIH CHI, ch. 64, and infra at the
-beginning of the INTRODUCTION.
-
-29. See Legge's Classics, vol. V, Prolegomena p. 27. Legge
-thinks that the TSO CHUAN must have been written in the 5th
-century, but not before 424 B.C.
-
-30. See MENCIUS III. 1. iii. 13-20.
-
-31. When Wu first appears in the CH`UN CH`IU in 584, it is
-already at variance with its powerful neighbor. The CH`UN CH`IU
-first mentions Yueh in 537, the TSO CHUAN in 601.
-
-32. This is explicitly stated in the TSO CHUAN, XXXII, 2.
-
-33. There is this to be said for the later period, that the feud
-would tend to grow more bitter after each encounter, and thus
-more fully justify the language used in XI. ss. 30.
-
-34. With Wu Yuan himself the case is just the reverse: -- a
-spurious treatise on war has been fathered on him simply because
-he was a great general. Here we have an obvious inducement to
-forgery. Sun Wu, on the other hand, cannot have been widely
-known to fame in the 5th century.
-
-35. From TSO CHUAN: "From the date of King Chao's accession
-[515] there was no year in which Ch`u was not attacked by Wu."
-
-36. Preface ad fin: "My family comes from Lo-an, and we are
-really descended from Sun Tzu. I am ashamed to say that I only
-read my ancestor's work from a literary point of view, without
-comprehending the military technique. So long have we been
-enjoying the blessings of peace!"
-
-37. Hoa-yin is about 14 miles from T`ung-kuan on the eastern
-border of Shensi. The temple in question is still visited by
-those about the ascent of the Western Sacred Mountain. It is
-mentioned in a text as being "situated five LI east of the
-district city of Hua-yin. The temple contains the Hua-shan
-tablet inscribed by the T`ang Emperor Hsuan Tsung [713-755]."
-
-38. See my "Catalogue of Chinese Books" (Luzac & Co., 1908), no.
-40.
-
-39. This is a discussion of 29 difficult passages in Sun Tzu.
-
-40. Cf. Catalogue of the library of Fan family at Ningpo: "His
-commentary is frequently obscure; it furnishes a clue, but does
-not fully develop the meaning."
-
-41. WEN HSIEN T`UNG K`AO, ch. 221.
-
-42. It is interesting to note that M. Pelliot has recently
-discovered chapters 1, 4 and 5 of this lost work in the "Grottos
-of the Thousand Buddhas." See B.E.F.E.O., t. VIII, nos. 3-4, p.
-525.
-
-43. The Hsia, the Shang and the Chou. Although the last-named
-was nominally existent in Sun Tzu's day, it retained hardly a
-vestige of power, and the old military organization had
-practically gone by the board. I can suggest no other
-explanation of the passage.
-
-44. See CHOU LI, xxix. 6-10.
-
-45. T`UNG K`AO, ch. 221.
-
-46. This appears to be still extant. See Wylie's "Notes," p. 91
-(new edition).
-
-47. T`UNG K`AO, loc. cit.
-
-48. A notable person in his day. His biography is given in the
-SAN KUO CHIH, ch. 10.
-
-49. See XI. ss. 58, note.
-
-50. HOU HAN SHU, ch. 17 ad init.
-
-51. SAN KUO CHIH, ch. 54.
-
-52. SUNG SHIH, ch. 365 ad init.
-
-53. The few Europeans who have yet had an opportunity of
-acquainting themselves with Sun Tzu are not behindhand in their
-praise. In this connection, I may perhaps be excused for quoting
-from a letter from Lord Roberts, to whom the sheets of the
-present work were submitted previous to publication: "Many of
-Sun Wu's maxims are perfectly applicable to the present day, and
-no. 11 [in Chapter VIII] is one that the people of this country
-would do well to take to heart."
-
-54. Ch. 140.
-
-55. See IV. ss. 3.
-
-56. The allusion may be to Mencius VI. 2. ix. 2.
-
-57. The TSO CHUAN.
-
-58. SHIH CHI, ch. 25, fol. I.
-
-59. Cf. SHIH CHI, ch 47.
-
-60. See SHU CHING, preface ss. 55.
-
-61. See SHIH CHI, ch. 47.
-
-62. Lun Yu, XV. 1.
-
-63. I failed to trace this utterance.
-
-64. Supra.
-
-65. Supra.
-
-66. The other four being worship, mourning, entertainment of
-guests, and festive rites. See SHU CHING, ii. 1. III. 8, and
-CHOU LI, IX. fol. 49.
-
-67. See XIII. ss. 11, note.
-
-68. This is a rather obscure allusion to the TSO CHUAN, where
-Tzu-ch`an says: "If you have a piece of beautiful brocade, you
-will not employ a mere learner to make it up."
-
-69. Cf. TAO TE CHING, ch. 31.
-
-70. Sun Hsing-yen might have quoted Confucius again. See LUN
-YU, XIII. 29, 30.
-
-71. Better known as Hsiang Yu [233-202 B.C.].
-
-72. SHIH CHI, ch. 47.
-
-73. SHIH CHI, ch. 38.
-
-74. See XIII. ss. 27, note. Further details on T`ai Kung will
-be found in the SHIH CHI, ch. 32 ad init. Besides the tradition
-which makes him a former minister of Chou Hsin, two other
-accounts of him are there given, according to which he would
-appear to have been first raised from a humble private station by
-Wen Wang.
-
------------------------------------------------------------------
-
-I. LAYING PLANS
-
- [Ts`ao Kung, in defining the meaning of the Chinese for the
-title of this chapter, says it refers to the deliberations in the
-temple selected by the general for his temporary use, or as we
-should say, in his tent. See. ss. 26.]
-
- 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.
-
- [It appears from what follows that Sun Tzu means by "Moral
-Law" a principle of harmony, not unlike the Tao of Lao Tzu in its
-moral aspect. One might be tempted to render it by "morale,"
-were it not considered as an attribute of the ruler in ss. 13.]
-
- 5, 6. 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.
-
- [Tu Yu quotes Wang Tzu as saying: "Without constant
-practice, the officers will be nervous and undecided when
-mustering for battle; without constant practice, the general will
-be wavering and irresolute when the crisis is at hand."]
-
- 7. HEAVEN signifies night and day, cold and heat, times and
-seasons.
-
- [The commentators, I think, make an unnecessary mystery of
-two words here. Meng Shih refers to "the hard and the soft,
-waxing and waning" of Heaven. Wang Hsi, however, may be right in
-saying that what is meant is "the general economy of Heaven,"
-including the five elements, the four seasons, wind and clouds,
-and other phenomena.]
-
- 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,
-sincerity, benevolence, courage and strictness.
-
- [The five cardinal virtues of the Chinese are (1) humanity
-or benevolence; (2) uprightness of mind; (3) self-respect, self-
-control, or "proper feeling;" (4) wisdom; (5) sincerity or good
-faith. Here "wisdom" and "sincerity" are put before "humanity or
-benevolence," and the two military virtues of "courage" and
-"strictness" substituted for "uprightness of mind" and "self-
-respect, self-control, or 'proper feeling.'"]
-
- 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?
-
- [I.e., "is in harmony with his subjects." Cf. ss. 5.]
-
- (2) Which of the two generals has most ability?
- (3) With whom lie the advantages derived from Heaven and
-Earth?
-
- [See ss. 7,8]
-
- (4) On which side is discipline most rigorously enforced?
-
- [Tu Mu alludes to the remarkable story of Ts`ao Ts`ao (A.D.
-155-220), who was such a strict disciplinarian that once, in
-accordance with his own severe regulations against injury to
-standing crops, he condemned himself to death for having allowed
-his horse to shy into a field of corn! However, in lieu of
-losing his head, he was persuaded to satisfy his sense of justice
-by cutting off his hair. Ts`ao Ts`ao's own comment on the
-present passage is characteristically curt: "when you lay down a
-law, see that it is not disobeyed; if it is disobeyed the
-offender must be put to death."]
-
- (5) Which army is stronger?
-
- [Morally as well as physically. As Mei Yao-ch`en puts it,
-freely rendered, "ESPIRIT DE CORPS and 'big battalions.'"]
-
- (6) On which side are officers and men more highly trained?
-
- [Tu Yu quotes Wang Tzu as saying: "Without constant
-practice, the officers will be nervous and undecided when
-mustering for battle; without constant practice, the general will
-be wavering and irresolute when the crisis is at hand."]
-
- (7) In which army is there the greater constancy both in
-reward and punishment?
-
- [On which side is there the most absolute certainty that
-merit will be properly rewarded and misdeeds summarily punished?]
-
- 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!
-
- [The form of this paragraph reminds us that Sun Tzu's
-treatise was composed expressly for the benefit of his patron Ho
-Lu, king of the Wu State.]
-
- 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.
-
- [Sun Tzu, as a practical soldier, will have none of the
-"bookish theoric." He cautions us here not to pin our faith to
-abstract principles; "for," as Chang Yu puts it, "while the main
-laws of strategy can be stated clearly enough for the benefit of
-all and sundry, you must be guided by the actions of the enemy in
-attempting to secure a favorable position in actual warfare." On
-the eve of the battle of Waterloo, Lord Uxbridge, commanding the
-cavalry, went to the Duke of Wellington in order to learn what
-his plans and calculations were for the morrow, because, as he
-explained, he might suddenly find himself Commander-in-chief and
-would be unable to frame new plans in a critical moment. The
-Duke listened quietly and then said: "Who will attack the first
-tomorrow -- I or Bonaparte?" "Bonaparte," replied Lord Uxbridge.
-"Well," continued the Duke, "Bonaparte has not given me any idea
-of his projects; and as my plans will depend upon his, how can
-you expect me to tell you what mine are?" [1] ]
-
- 18. All warfare is based on deception.
-
- [The truth of this pithy and profound saying will be
-admitted by every soldier. Col. Henderson tells us that
-Wellington, great in so many military qualities, was especially
-distinguished by "the extraordinary skill with which he concealed
-his movements and deceived both friend and foe."]
-
- 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.
-
- [All commentators, except Chang Yu, say, "When he is in
-disorder, crush him." It is more natural to suppose that Sun Tzu
-is still illustrating the uses of deception in war.]
-
- 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.
-
- [Wang Tzu, quoted by Tu Yu, says that the good tactician
-plays with his adversary as a cat plays with a mouse, first
-feigning weakness and immobility, and then suddenly pouncing upon
-him.]
-
- 23. If he is taking his ease, give him no rest.
-
- [This is probably the meaning though Mei Yao-ch`en has the
-note: "while we are taking our ease, wait for the enemy to tire
-himself out." The YU LAN has "Lure him on and tire him out."]
-
-If his forces are united, separate them.
-
- [Less plausible is the interpretation favored by most of the
-commentators: "If sovereign and subject are in accord, put
-division between 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.
-
- [Chang Yu tells us that in ancient times it was customary
-for a temple to be set apart for the use of a general who was
-about to take the field, in order that he might there elaborate
-his plan of campaign.]
-
-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.
-
-
-[1] "Words on Wellington," by Sir. W. Fraser.
-
------------------------------------------------------------------
-
-II. WAGING WAR
-
-
-
<TRUNCATED>