The Art of War by Sun Tzu (elon musk reading list TXT) 📕

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. ↩

See B.E.F.E.O., t. VIII, nos. 3⁠–⁠4, p. 525. ↩

Wên Hsien Tʽung Kʽao, ch. 221, f. 9: 世謂牧慨然最喜論兵欲試而不得者其學能道春秋戰國時事甚博而詳知兵者有取焉. ↩

Preface to his commentary (Tʽu Shu, 經籍典, ch. 442): 武之所論大約用仁義使機權也. ↩

Preface to his commentary (Tʽu Shu, 經籍典, ch. 442): 自武死後凡千歲將兵者有成者有敗者勘其事跡皆與武所著書一一相抵當. ↩

Tʽung Kʽao, ch. 221, f. 9: 皥以曹公注隱微杜牧注闊踈重為之注云. ↩

Tʽung Kʽao, ch. 221, f. 9: 皥以曹公注隱微杜牧注闊踈重為之注云. ↩

The Hsia, the Shang and the Chou. Although the last-named was nominally existent in Sun Tzǔ’s day, it retained hardly a vestige of power, and the old military organisation had practically gone by the board. I can suggest no other explanation of the passage. ↩

See Chou Li XXIX 6⁠–⁠10. ↩

See Tʽu Shu, 戎政典, ch. 90, f. 2 vo: 後之學者徒見其書又各牽於己見是以注者雖多而少當也獨吾友聖俞不然嘗評武之書曰此戰國相傾之說也三代王者之師司馬九伐之法武不及也然亦愛其文略而意深其行師用兵料敵制勝亦皆有法其言甚有序次而注者汩之或失其意乃自為注凡膠于偏見者皆抉去傳以己意而發之然後武之說不汩而明吾知此書當與三家並傳而後世取其說者往往于吾聖俞多焉. ↩

Tʽung Kʽao, ch. 221, f. 11 ro: 皙以古本校正闕誤. ↩

See 四庫全書, ch. 99, f. 16 vo. ↩

This appears to be still extant. See Wylie’s “Notes,” p. 91 (new edition). ↩

Tʽung Kʽao, ch. 221, f. 11 ro: 仁廟時天下久承平人不習兵元昊既叛邊將數敗朝廷頗訪知兵者士大夫人人言兵矣故本朝注解孫武書者大抵皆其時人也. ↩

A notable person in his day. His biography is given in the San Kuo Chih, ch. 10. ↩

Ch. 100, ff. 2, 3. ↩

See note 672. ↩

Hou Han Shu, ch. 17 ad init. ↩

San Kuo Chih, ch. 54 f. 10 vo (commentary). ↩

Sung Shih, ch. 365 ad init. ↩

The few Europeans who have yet had an opportunity of acquainting themselves with Sun Tzǔ 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 ‘The art of war teaches us to rely⁠ ⁠…’ in ch. VIII is one that the people of this country would do well to take to heart.” ↩

Ch. 140, f. 13 ro. ↩

See IV. (“Thus the good fighter is able⁠ ⁠…”) ↩

The allusion may be to Mencius VI 2 IX 2: 戰必克. ↩

武用兵不能必克與書所言遠甚吳起與武一體之人皆著書言兵世稱之曰孫吳然而起之言兵也輕法制草略無所統紀不若武之書詞約而義盡. ↩

The Tso Chuan. ↩

孫子十三篇不惟武人之根本文士亦當盡心焉其詞約而縟易而深暢而可用論語易大傳之流孟荀楊著書皆不及也. ↩

是啟人君窮兵黷武之心. ↩

Shih Chi, ch. 25, fol. 1: 兵者聖人所以討彊暴平亂世夷險阻救危殆自含血戴角之獸見犯則校而况於人懷好惡喜怒之氣喜則愛心生怒則毒螫加情性之理也⁠ ⁠… 豈與世儒闇於大較不權輕重猥云德化不當用兵大至窘辱失守小乃侵犯削弱遂執不移等哉故教笞不可廢於家刑罰不可捐於國誅伐不可偃於天下用之有巧拙行之有逆順耳. ↩

The first instance of 木索 given in the Pʽei Wên Yün Fu is from Ssǔ-ma Chʽien’s letter to 仼安 Jên An (see 文選, ch. 41, f. 9 ro), where M. Chavannes translates it la cangue et la chaîne. But in the present passage it seems rather to indicate some single instrument of torture. ↩

兵者刑也刑者政事也為夫子之徒實仲由冉求之事也今者據案聽訟械繋罪人笞死于巿者吏之所為也驅兵數萬撅其城郭纍其妻子斬其罪人亦吏之所為也木索兵刃無異意也笞之與斬無異刑也小而易制用力少者木索笞也大而難治用力多者兵刃斬也俱期於除去惡民安活善民. ↩

Cf. Shih Chi, ch. 47, f. 11 vo. ↩

季孫問于冉有曰子之戰學之乎性達之乎對曰學之季孫曰事孔子惡乎學冉有曰即學之於孔子者大聖兼該文武並用適聞其戰法實未之詳也夫不知自何代何年何人分為二道曰文曰武離而俱行因使縉紳之士不敢言兵甚或恥言之苟有言者世以為麤暴異人人不比數嗚呯亡失根本斯為最甚. ↩

See Shu Ching, preface § 55. ↩

See Tso Chuan, 定公 X 2; Shih Chi, ch. 47, f. 4 ro. ↩

周公相成王制禮作樂尊大儒術有淮夷叛則出征之夫子相魯公會于夾谷曰有文事者必有武備叱辱齊侯伏不敢動是二大聖人豈不知兵乎. ↩

Lun Yü, XV 1. ↩

Tso Chuan, 哀公, XI 7. ↩

See supra. (“When Confucius held office⁠ ⁠…”) ↩

Tso Chuan, 定公, X 2. ↩

Tso Chuan, XII 5; Chia Yü, ch. 1 ad fin. ↩

I have failed to trace this utterance. See note 123. ↩

See supra. (“Chi-sun asked Jan Yu⁠ ⁠…”) ↩

性理彙要, ch. 17: 昔吾夫子對衛靈公以軍旅之事未之學答孔文子以甲兵之事未之聞及觀夾谷之會則以兵加萊人而齊侯懼費人之亂則命將士以伐之而費人北嘗曰我戰則克而冉有亦曰聖人文武並用孔子豈有眞未學未聞哉特以軍旅甲兵之事非所以爲訓也. ↩

See supra. (“He once uttered the words⁠ ⁠…”) ↩

Viz., 軍禮, the other four being 吉, 凶, 賓 and 嘉 “worship mourning, entertainment of guests and festive rites.” See Shu Ching, II, 1 III 8, and Chou Li, IX fol. 49. ↩

Preface to Sun Tzǔ: 孔子曰軍旅之事未之學又曰我戰則克孔子定禮正樂兵則五禮之一不必以為專門之學故云未學所為聖人有所不知或行軍好謀則學之或善將將如伍子胥之用孫子又何必自學之故又曰我戰則克也. ↩

See note 743. ↩

This is a rather obscure allusion to Tso Chuan, 襄公, XXXI 4, where Tzǔ-chʽan says: 子有美錦不使人學製焉 “If you have a piece of beautiful brocade, you will not employ a mere learner to make it up.” ↩

Cf. Tao Tê Ching, ch. 31: 兵者不祥之器. ↩

Sun Hsing-yen might have quoted Confucius again. See Lun Yü, XIII 29, 30. ↩