Don't be a Victim of the Borrowed Knife

[Jordan]

While reading Anthony's post about the instigation to fight, I recall one of the 36 strategies called "Borrow a Knife to Murder"

This strategy can be described as follows. A (which can represent a person, a group, an organization, or a nation) holds some grudge against B or C, or against both. But A is too weak to fight against either of them. So A pretends to champion the cause of one against the other, and instigate them to fight ending in "pain and death". In the end A conquer both of them.

Although I see Michael has already stated his regrets that his posts came across in this manner, I am sure this post will still be of benefit as it highlights an important strategy.

[pete]

Dear Sipak Jordan,

Thanks for the link to the 36 strategies.
I haven't had a chance to read them all yet but I'm sure it is the type of writing that I will return to again and again.
Some great titles.

[Jonny Say]

Dear Michael Udel,

I remember that once Sifu Stier insulted you personally. I think it was on a thread regarding Chinese Medicine, and I remember the incident very well because you responded by thanking Sifu Stier for the insult. At that time I was very impressed by your response.

Having read Jordan Sisook's post, I can't help wondering how true or falsely, conciously or unconciously you relate to the "Borrow Knife to Murder" strategy.

I remember I was quite surprised when you denounced yourself from Shaolin Wahnam so soon after taking the intensive Kung Fu course, and that it was made quite a big affair on the forum. I had got the impression you were still searching through some of the internal arts to find one that suited, and was surprised that your stopping training Shaolin Wahnam was made such a large event.

Following the forum here has made me grow in understanding (including the more volatile recent threads). The talk about differentiating false from real by some of the Shaolin Wahnam Sifu's is particularly relevant for me and for others. By themselves your responses to Sifu Stier's personal insult and your disassociation from Shaolin Wahnam were isolated incidents, but now I could see a common factor linking them together. These two incidents could give you reason to provoke conflict between Sifu Stier and the Shaolin Wahnam Sifu's.

Would you like to comment on this speculation (note the word speculation). I don't mean to pressurise you at all, its just I was so surprised at your recent comments, having valued and enjoyed your inputs to the forum so much previously.

[Antonius]

Hey Jonny,

Interesting point. I remember that thread. Inspired by the masterful searching of Sunyata , I located it here:

http://www.wongkiewkit.com/forum/showthread.php?p=21642#post21642

Anyway, maybe you didn't see, but Michael has decided to leave the forum. You can read about that here:

http://wongkiewkit.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3288

Best,

[Jonny Say]

Thanks for pointing that out Anthony Sipac, I hadn't managed to get through the multitude of new posts on the forum yet (time has been a little constraint for forum time recently!).

Well I wish Michael the best, and hope my post didn't seem antagonistic. But this now presents an excellent opportunity to discuss this topic, and I look forward to hearing other peoples views on this strategy.

[Piers]

Dear Jonny Sisook (I think), in Michael's absence I did want to make a reply - and I'm amused to see that I'm defending him over a question relating to his defence of Sifu Stier (and as a practising member of Shaolin Wahnam I can assure you I have no wish to provoke any conflict between us and anyone else at all).

What I want to say is this: everything I know of Michael Udell leads me to believe that he is an honourable person. I am quite certain that the reason he defended Sifu Stier was because he believed Sifu Stier was being treated unfairly. He may have lost his cool and overstated things, but I'm talking about his motivations. I made one or two posts because I too was uncomfortable with Sifu Stier's treatment.

So my point is: a reasonable and honourable person with the best of intentions could feel the need to defend Sifu Stier or criticise the posts made against Sifu Stier. There's no need to see any kind of sinister motive, subconscious or conscious.

In fact, I think it's important that we do accept that Michael is reasonable and honourable and yet still saw what he believed was unfair treatment. Otherwise it suggests that we think that anyone finding fault with Wahnam is automatically wrong and possibly deluded. And that is a dangerous way of thinking.

[Antonius]

Good points, Piers. And yet, don't you agree that Michael's recent behavior was somewhat uncharacteristic? It is precisely because he is normally such a reasonable person that some of his recent posts made me raise an eyebrow.

Also, I don't think one necessarily has to be sinister or evil in order to subconsciously try to "get back" at someone. We do it all the time, even with people we love. For example, I'm still trying to get back at my older brother for beating me up when we were kids.

Anyway, I think we all agree that Michael has a good heart, and that his presence here will be missed.

[Piers]

Actually I did think it was a bit uncharacteristic, yes. I was a bit taken aback. And good point about subconscious motivations...

[Jonny Say]

Dear Piers (if you learned from Sigung then I believe you are my Sisook as my Sifu is Darryl),

I hear what you are saying but it was the severity of Michaels words(someone who was so polite and calm normally), not the fact that he was defending Sifu Stier, which got me thinking. As it was so uncharacteristic I was trying to understand why.

I wasn't try to imply anything sinister, it was more that alot of Michael's recent posts had the feeling to me of much emotional hurt behind them (of course I could be way off here).

I can see how my post may have looked, and didn't mean to imply anything suspect in Michael's character, as Anthony Sipac put it, it was precisely because of his good character that I had any question.

[Piers]

Jonny, I see exactly what you mean. It's easy to get the wrong end of the stick in a forum! (I think there's a lesson there.)

[Michael Durkin]

Greetings all,

I also feel that Michael Udel's behaviour was somewhat uncharacteristic. After all, I have met and trained with Michael on an intensive Kung Fu course in Malaysia last year (click here for a pic). I first noticed Michael's characteristic big smile, and of course enjoyed the informative discussions we all had together.

I feel in the heat of the moment, as things often do, Michaels behaviour did change from the gentle giant I met in Malaysia. But were all human, we practice these arts because we want to grow. And I think everyone can agree that everyone's development has moved a great deal because of recent events.

Take care, keep smiling Michael Udel.

[Jamie Robson]

Dear All

I agree that the situation created by these posts relates with 'Borrow a Knife to Murder'. However, I find hard to believe it was intentional due to the fruitless outcome.

The 36 Strategies are very powerful. A planned application should be almost, if not completely, invisible. The result would cause groups 'B' and 'C' wiping each other out, either in words or action. 'A' then gains full advantage by having both his opponents removing each other.

Finally, every attack has a counter. Would anyone care to offer one?"

[Jonny Say]

Dear All,

This thread is an excellent opportunity to discuss the concepts of strategies which are very important for us within Shaolin Wahnam. So without wanting to go over any of the recent events on the forum it would be great to discuss this concept more so. In discussing the topic we should leave out Michael Udel and Sifu Stier as examples, moving onto other ones such as historic or personal, as we have agreed the former was not an intentional use of "borrowing a knife to commit murder" and wish to move on.

So I would invite forum members to think about examples they have from their own lives of using this strategy?

Examples of historic uses of this strategy?

And to answer my Siheng Jamie's question about methods to counter this strategy, using theoretical or real life examples.

We can look at the shortcomings and pitfalls of examples, the strengths, the intention and morality or anything else we like that is relevant to this strategy.

I would also highlight that in Shaolin Wahnam the use of strategies and tactics (as with all our assets) should be for good and to avoid evil, in line with the 10 Shaolin Laws.

Any takers?

[cnholmes]

Thank you Jordan for sharing that link

I haven't read all of the strategies yet, I'm about half way through. I shall finish after posting this.

The strategies I've read so far, and the one described here, seem to me to be deceitful. If you practice them you will become a deceitful person. You might feel very powerful by causing misery to your 'enemies', but inside you will be sick.

The only counter I know for the 'Borrowed Knife' is not to be led by the nose like a twit. If someone offends you, it is they who you should stand up to, or let it pass.

I'm not going to share examples someone might use them.

Regards,
Chris.

[precious_Duck]

Thank you Jordan for sharing that link

I haven't read all of the strategies yet, I'm about half way through. I shall finish after posting this.

The strategies I've read so far, and the one described here, seem to me to be deceitful. If you practice them you will become a deceitful person. You might feel very powerful by causing misery to your 'enemies', but inside you will be sick.

The only counter I know for the 'Borrowed Knife' is not to be led by the nose like a twit. If someone offends you, it is they who you should stand up to, or let it pass.

I'm not going to share examples someone might use them.

Regards,
Chris.

I absolutly agree.
But not all are like that. Some of the Strategems are just using common sense, specifically the "Strategems for desperate situations".

MY opinion.
pD