Introduction

At first, this verse sounds like wisdom: strategic restraint, the strength of humility, a kind of elegant non-aggression. Nearly every English translation renders the tone of this passage as sincere from start to finish. Many commentaries treat it as an endorsement of Sunzi-style martial philosophy. But that reading misses how this verse expands on the concept of “Using People” (verse 68).

Here, Laozi mimics the voice of the “doctrine of force,” not to align with it, but to expose it. The first half of the verse is a quoted construct, a rhetorical feint that slips through our guard. We follow the rhythm of careful retreat and tactical holding, only to have that logic broken in the next breath. 

This commentary departs from most readings by rejecting the idea that Laozi is offering military strategy in spiritual form. He isn’t. He’s using familiar language to smuggle in a direct challenge to how we typically operate. 

Translation

Concerning the use of force, it is said:
  “I do not act as the host,
    but as the guest.
  I do not advance an inch,
    but retreat a foot.”

This is called,
  “Acting without moving.”
  “Supporting without arms.”
  “Holding without military force.”
And thus,
  “Invincibility!”

There is no disaster greater than lacking enemies.
With no enemies to chop and destroy me, “I” remain.

Therefore,
  Balanced forces are a sad victory. 

Commentary

Concerning the use of force, it is said:
  “I do not act as the host,
    but as the guest.
  I do not advance an inch,
    but retreat a foot.”

This is called,
  “Acting without moving.”
  “Supporting without arms.”
  “Holding without military force.”
And thus,
  “Invincibility!”

In the political-military domain, it’s just common sense. 

The Zhou dynasty, the longest in Chinese history, was a golden age of stability leading to technological, philosophical, spiritual, and social advancement. And it’s collapsing. Vassal states are vying for power, each using the well-established and highly ritualized military tactics, leading to futile battles of attrition. Political instability, constant warfare, and shifting alliances put military action at the center of leadership and social consciousness. The population is experiencing conscription alongside widespread death and suffering. Something needs to change. In comes Sun Zi, revolutionizing military tactics and winning more decisively with fewer losses. On the surface, Sunzi’s innovations appear to echo Daoist restraint: yielding instead of attacking, indirect action over brute force. But the goal is still survival, not dissolution.

Be the responsive guest instead of the initiating host. Making significant concessions now to win later, instead of forcing forward inch by inch. Win without deploying military forces, support allies without over-extending resources. Do whatever it takes to hold territory peacefully, conserving soldiers for the front lines and keeping the peasantry happy. These all seem completely aligned with our text’s teachings. Nothing would be better than being able to hold and maintain peaceful power again, using diplomacy and shows of force to become invincible instead of endless carnage. 

But restraint as tactical wisdom is not spiritual maturity. In a teaching style that will develop for thousands of years, the verse uses what people already know to get inside their guard, setting them up for a 1-2 knockout combo.