Yesterday, while I was thinking hard about an important matter, I was putting away leftover food after dinner. So my mind wasn't on the food. As a result, chicken and vegetables fell out haphazardly as I was transferring them from the large steel pot to a small glass container. Instead of the food inside the container, it was all over the kitchen counter. The more I messed up, the more perturbed I was. And the more perturbed I was, the bigger the mess became. It was a scene of folly for this Sun Tzu student.

I took it for granted that I could do a simple task such that I failed miserably at it. There were only a few effective ways, ways I call the narrow divine paths, but I veered away from all those paths because I was distracted.

Therefore, to do things well, it takes this one thing to succeed at whatever we do. What is this one thing? It is our ability to think. As much as I love sports, as human beings, our strength in the animal kingdom isn't our physical attributes but our mental ones.

For example, Usain Bolt for the longest time was considered the fastest man on earth. He has many fans. But most house cats can outrun Usain Bolt. Perhaps that's why we are also fans of cats.

From playing the violin to doing accounting work, you cannot force your way into accomplishment. It takes knowledge, patience, awareness, and focus. Even in activities such as football, weightlifting, and boxing, without having the mental wherewithal, one cannot achieve his or her physical aim.

Is it any coincidence that in human biology, although the brain expends an inordinate amount of energy, it is the last part of the body to shut down if food were scarce (or fallen off onto the kitchen counter)? Our body knows that our mental capability increases our chances of survival more than other capability. Sun Tzu knows this, too:

​Sun Tzu knows that every situation is different, even though we might assume it is the same as in the past. When we are lulled into thinking we have mastered something, we open ourselves to the possibility of failure. Failure itself usually isn't too bad, but when it is preventable, it can be.

​In the Bible, the military leader Gideon picked his soldiers by how they drank water when they are extremely thirsty. He chose men who drank but still kept their heads up to maintain their awareness of the surrounding; they understood and took seriously their task to protect the nation no matter the hardship or distraction. Gideon sent home the ones who simply drank water, those who lost track of their one job.

Similarly, whether in simple or complex tasks, you must pay attention to and think about what is before you. By doing so, you can complete it quickly and efficiently, allowing you to turn to other important tasks.

Any automaton can follow orders or repeat past steps over and over but only a thinking person can choose to evaluate what is different about the situation this time around -- and it is always different from the last time -- to gain an advantage over the competition. This is also the divine path to self-improvement, which I hope is a more narrow path than any opponent's.

To be human is to think. To be humane is to think even harder and choosing your own path because you have a deep understanding that it is the right thing to do. That, my friends, is what makes a person superior.

Today I encountered a passage from a common but inferior Art of War translation that said, "Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him."

The passage can be found in Chapter One, Calculations with the Chinese text 利而誘之，亂而取之. I translated it as, "If they seek advantage, bait them; if they are in chaos, capture them."

I have bolded the specific sentence in question above. One can also translate it as "take" them or even "invade" them, but "crush" them is careless and misleading. It seems like a small difference but it is not. It is a chasm. It is like hearing the commander say, "Seize this city" and interpreting it as "Destroy this city."

The accuracy of a sentence's translation is one important consideration, but let's also look at that sentence's alignment with Sun Tzu's key principles. If you consider the overall context of The Art of War, the book's advice is clear. Below are five examples of passages that run counter to "crush him":

Sun Tzu prefers preservation of gains over crushing anybody or anything and losing those gains. Thus, if the enemy is in chaos and you have the initiative, why would you want to crush him when you can leave him whole? 

When the enemy is in chaos, it is in a disadvantaged and weak position. In contrast, we are in an advantaged and strong position. As Sun Tzu advised above, the wise move would not be to "crush him," but to surround him. The enemy poses no threat and we are vastly superior. So it makes sense we would leave an outlet so they can retreat home. This is analogous to a caring big brother holding off his sibling versus a mean bully pursuing his victim. Sun Tzu tops off this passage by saying it is a principle of war.

The benefit of receiving Sun Tzu's instruction is to be a wise leader in situations of emotional conflict. We want to become skilled, controlled, and competent. As such, our goal as mentioned above is to "take All-Under-Heaven intact." Similar to our previous example, Sun Tzu ended the verse by stating it is a principle of planning attacks. According to Sun Tzu, one would never want to plan to crush the enemy. That would be when there is a breakdown in the execution of our aim, something we would not want to happen, much less plan for.

The quote above is hardly from a person who would promote crushing an enemy. It would seem he wants to not only capture the enemy unharmed but also try to incorporate them into his own forces. Again, the difference in the two ideas is vast.

​And last, this is one of my most favorite quotes in The Art of War:

Sun Tzu was a man of great compassion, because he was a man of great strength and wisdom. He understood the objective isn't to "crush" or destroy the opponent but to quickly achieve equilibrium. His desire seems focused on treading lightly, doing as little harm as possible, and return things back to normal again. In other words, war isn't normal. Peace is normal.

Critics will say this sort of peace is only temporary. But everything is temporary. In a changing world, nothing is ever permanent. Sun Tzu had the ability to handle war and conflict with aplomb. Therefore, it is better for him to establish peace right now when violence has broken out than to achieve an idealized permanent peace later on. Along those same lines, it is better to start building bridges and wait to be able to complete it in the future -- Sun Tzu's concept of timing -- than to induce, continue, or exacerbate hatred now and crush any hope of success in the future.

It is amazing how many people know about Sun Tzu's Art of War. I would say that almost anybody who has been educated has at least heard of the book, not only in China but all around the world.

However, as ubiquitous as Sun Tzu's Art of War is, that doesn't necessarily mean its understanding is ubiquitous. Because of its title, people's perception of The Art of War is sometimes far off from reality, especially when they haven't read the book. There are too many misperceptions to explain fully in one blog entry -- perhaps this topic will become a series -- so today I would like to focus on just one. Let me start with the following quote from Chapter One, Calculations:

If one were to not read the above quote carefully, he or she would think it is fine to be unable and appear to be able. Unfortunately this runs counter to Sun Tzu's principles. He stresses the importance of defense and achieving invincibility first and only then would the leader consider an attack. He or she must be completely prepared at all times in an anticipation of an enemy attack. Therefore, if you are unable, this would spell trouble.

Furthermore, you would never engage in battle unless you are 100 percent capable of winning that battle. You would want to control that variable completely, and not allow the opponent to control it. If you are unable, you are putting yourself at risk unnecessarily, trying to bluff your way into a victory. Sooner or later, the opposition would call that bluff. Instead, as Sun Tzu advises, build strength and be capable, and there will be more than enough opportunities to take afterwards. It would simply be a matter of timing.

So the sound approach would be to come from a strong, safe, and positive position and point of view. As I described in "What is the mark of peace?", it is difficult to be positive without first being strong. When you are strong, you tend to smile more, joke with others more, and spread the joy that is in your heart to others more, making the battles in life at least a little more bearable. I hope your benevolence spreads all the way up to the Heavens and across All-Under-Heaven.

The Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius (121 AD - 180 AD) noted, "The Lacedaemonians at their public spectacles used to set seats in the shade for strangers, but themselves sat down anywhere."

The Lacedaemonians lived in Lacedaemon, better known as Sparta. It would seem strange that a military state like Sparta would have citizens who display such kindness to strangers, but one could argue it is the fact they understood the hardships of war that they were able to understand the value of comfort. This is in accordance to Sun Tzu: "If one is not fully cognizant of the dangers inherent in doing battle, one cannot fully know the benefits of doing battle."

It is another fact that Lacedaemonian women had virtually the same amount of freedom as men. From birth, girls were educated and literate. As women, they studied philosophy (as advocated by my intellectual hero Musonius), were able to own property, and were even able to speak out in public against men. How does one explain Lacedaemonian women having these freedoms in 7th century BC? Could it be that the Lacedaemonians valued liberty so much that they can't stand seeing others in bondage?

In modern times, it is almost a certainty that the soldier who had seen the most battle would be the biggest dove. Take for example  US Marine Corps major general Smedley Butler (1881 – 1940), who was the most decorated Marine at the time of his death: 16 medals, five in heroism, two of which were the Medal of Honor. General Butler would spend the last part of his life educating people about the horrors of war and the profiteering of war. I'm sure he had his critics but I'm also certain they didn't have sufficient gravitas to challenge his position. He understood war inside and out, and thus was forceful and convincing in his opinion. His opposition didn't have a fighting chance.

​On a personal note, a few nights ago I had an emotional dream. For whatever reason, I had no car and had to rely on the bus to get home. When I was young, I rode the bus on a regular basis, whether it was to go to school or to go to work. So I am no stranger to public transportation. However, in my dream, I felt a heavy sense of helplessness. I had no money and no idea where I was or how to get back home. Every stranger I was able to talk with were either very mean or when they did try to help, it was wrong or inadequate. People had good intentions but didn't go far enough to ensure I was indeed on the right path. It wasn't until I came across a poor woman with children was I able to get real assistance. She understood exactly how helpless I was feeling, and so had the empathy to make sure I finally got on the right bus that took me home.

In the examples above, you can see that the mark of peace is having a deep appreciation of peace. And to truly appreciate peace, one must have experienced the grave absence of it, which can be found in loss, hardship, struggle, conflict, and, ultimately, violent combat. When people have experienced such pain, they tend to not only empathize with others who experience the same pain but they also have a firm and impenetrable conviction for peace. Only someone ignorant of his or her weakness would try to oppose this position of strength, and he or she would fall flat.

This is analogous to Epictetus's lesson about a bull that knows he can charge forward to protect the herd from an attacking lion. That capability doesn't happen overnight. It takes training, practice, and experience. Only then can awareness, reasoning, and empathy become strengths. Only then can those strengths be translated into tangible results. And only then can peace be possible even in the face of trouble, adversity, and misfortune.

Sonshi.com acquired ☮️.com and NoWar.com in 2017. In 2018, we are making good use of them. We aren't about never fighting -- at times it is necessary for swift self-defense -- but about having such overwhelming strength that one doesn't need to fight. We are about doing no harm by taking the initiative. We are about achieving positive, peaceful results by educating proper use of strategy instead of carelessly accepting war as a viable solution because it is often not. We ask that you join us in the effort.