BitaTruble
Posts: 9779
Joined: 1/12/2006 From: Texas Status: offline
|
I just finished reading The Art of War by Sun Tzu and found it intriguing to say the least. What struck me the most (especially the first 2/3 of the book) were how closely some of the strategies of war relate so well to an M/s dynamic such as the one which I share with Himself. side note: Just so we are on the same page, I read the translation by Giles with the 11 commentaries which was appears to have been the definitive translation due to the complex and intricate detailing of the side comments of the Chinese characters, something which was not seen as much in later translations.I have put in bold Sun Tzu and put in italics the interpretations so they can be easily distinguished for ease of discussion. The first of the five laws as set down by Sun Tzu The interpretation which follows is from Tu Wu, one of the 11. "Moral Law - a principle of harmony, not unlike the Tao of Lao Tzu in its moral aspect. One might be tempted to render it "morale", were it not considered as an attribute of the ruler. (s.s.13)" Tu Wu 1.5,6 - 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. Now, I have been living this "law" with Himself for a good number of years and it has not always gone over very well. Brain washed, mentally incapacitated and nuts have been some of the milder exclamations of my admission of living with this mindset. That the thought is not only unoriginal but fully embraced by a large populace of warriors for over 2400 years leaves me feeling just a wee bit validated because certainly Sun Tzu was never called a wacky waffle.. I'm sure of it. ::chuckles:: Wang Tzu in regard to this law, "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." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Most of the strategies in the book are simple common sense but here is another which caught my attention and seems to relate well to a healthy and functional M/s relationship on the profit of counsel: 2.16 ...avail yourself, also, of any helpful circumstance over and beyond ordinary rule. 2.17 ... accordingly as circumstances are favorable, one should modify one's plans. I read this as 'two heads are better than one' a position I have long held in works well in almost any intimate relationship but which sometimes gets lost in M/s - the mindset of a ruler who doesn't care what his generals think would not embrace such a concept as this particular strategy implies as does the mindset of a Master who doesn't believe that his servants add any thing of value. Such a mind-set seems to be small and ego-centric. Such a mindset would lose wars.. not win them. ~~~~~~~~~~~~ Last one (for this post - the text is rich, but I don't want to bog down discussion with too much of a good thing) .. 3.10 Hence, though an obstinate fight may be made by a small force, in the end it must be captured by the larger force. Well, that pretty much describes how it went down with Himself and I. His force captured my force (read: power). His will was stronger than mine so there was nothing to be done but capitulate to the superior force. There is so much more that I would love to discuss on this subject, but not knowing if there will be any interest, I will restrain myself for the moment and hope some discussion of substance can come from this and progress and grow. I am now in my third reading of this book in as many days and still finding gems. Also, I hope to find some other translations to compare and contrast with the one I have and see if there are any major differences of either translation or interpretation which would change the context. ~If a general is ignorant of the principles of adaptability, he must not be entrusted with a position of authority.~
_____________________________
"Oh, so it's just like Rock, paper, scissors." He laughed. "You are the wisest woman I know."
|