http://www.arcamax.com/nonfiction/b-1208-1
The Art of War
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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] --