misconception about JKD

i'm new to this site and allready have seen the myths an logic of JKD. how people think thats what makes us human. is it not bruces way of soming up combat his belief. here a qoute out of bruce lees book

Jeet Kune Do bruce lee's commentaries on the martial way.......edited by john little

On what is the "best" martial art.
there is no such thing as an effective segment of a totality. by that i mean that i personally do not believe in the word style. why because, unless ther are human beings with three arms and four legs,unless we have another group of beings on earth that are structurly different from us, there can be no different style of fighting. why is that? because we have two hands and two legs. now the unfortunate thing is that there's boxing, which uses hands, and judo, which uses throwing, i'm not putting them down, mind you-but because of styles, people are separated. they are not united together because styles became law. the original founder of the style started out with hypothesis. but now it has become the gospel truth, and people who go into that become the product of it. it dosn't matter how you are, who you are, how you are structured, how you are biult, or how you ared made...it doesn't seem to matter. you just go in there and become that product. and that to me, is not right.

this book has opend my eyes and has made me a better fighter and teacher.

You're leaving out a lot of the philosophy there that talks about it not being a style.

thats just one quote out of hundreds. what lees trying to say is don't get wrapt up in the style, theres more to martial arts than just that one style. obviously you have to start somewhere, i did, here's another few quotes, of bruce lee's remember this is only his views its up to you if you want to believe it or not..

The highest state is no form
I think the highest state of martial art, in application, must have no absolute form, and, to tackle pattern A with patern B may not be absolutly correct. i feel that martial art should not be limited in in a circle. that will produce in the students a wrong idea, thinkning that a certain pattern will achieve the same result in fighting as in practice.


Forms and katas are not the answer
I think simply to practice gung fu forms and karate katas is not a good way. moreover, it wastes time and does not match the actual (fighting) situation. some people are tall, some are short, some are stout, some are slim, there are various kinds of people. if all of them learn the same boxing (i.e. martial art) form, then who does it fit.


Jeet Kune Do is only a name. the most important thing is to avoid having bias in the training. although th principle of boxing is important, practicly is even more important

True observation begins when one is devoid of set patterns.

Freedom of expression occurs when one is beyond system.

A style is classified responce to one's chosen inclination.

In order to cope with what is, one must have the awareness and flexibility of teh styleless style. when i say "styleless style," i mean a style that has the totality without partiality; in short, it is a circle without circumference where every conceivable line in included

[QUOTE]Originally posted by FCFS:
thats just one quote out of hundreds. what lees trying to say is don't get wrapt up in the style, theres more to martial arts than just that one style. obviously you have to start somewhere, i did, here's another few quotes, of bruce lee's remember this is only his views its up to you if you want to believe it or not..

The highest state is no form
I think the highest state of martial art, in application, must have no absolute form, and, to tackle pattern A with patern B may not be absolutly correct. i feel that martial art should not be limited in in a circle. that will produce in the students a wrong idea, thinkning that a certain pattern will achieve the same result in fighting as in practice.


Forms and katas are not the answer
I think simply to practice gung fu forms and karate katas is not a good way. moreover, it wastes time and does not match the actual (fighting) situation. some people are tall, some are short, some are stout, some are slim, there are various kinds of people. if all of them learn the same boxing (i.e. martial art) form, then who does it fit.


Jeet Kune Do is only a name. the most important thing is to avoid having bias in the training. although th principle of boxing is important, practicly is even more important

True observation begins when one is devoid of set patterns.

Freedom of expression occurs when one is beyond system.

A style is classified responce to one's chosen inclination.

In order to cope with what is, one must have the awareness and flexibility of teh styleless style. when i say "styleless style," i mean a style that has the totality without partiality; in short, it is a circle without circumference where every conceivable line in included

[/QUOTE]

If I am interperting what you and Bruce are stating is that style is a weakness more than a strength. Style, by Bruce's words, is a "crystallization". Maybe this is stupid but Bruce always seemed to look at martial art as a state of matter (solid, liquid, and gas), he considers styles and forms to be a solid while explains Jeet Kune Do to simulate the persona of water, "when you put water in a cup it becomes the cup," . Bruce focused on flexibility and expression of self instead of changing self to become the style.

what i think bruce bruce was tring to say is don't be narrow minded and thing karate is the way teakwondo is the way or kung fu is the way. don't give u your style but work on the weaknes your style by that i mean if all your life you trained with your feet you go in the boxing ring your phucked you'll loose or fight on the ground. so then train your weakness so some boxing or some wrestling/BJJ.......thats what bruce lee did........and look whats evolved the no holds bared compitions.... who was efective in the first ufc? royce gracie.

all these masters of there art where loosing to this little bjj man then people started breaking away from there style to learn other styles, they worked on their weakness. you see kimo did prety well aginst royce because learned how to do the basic grappling he learned a few little tricks for the ground, because he knew thats where royce was gonna take him. i'll tell ya if kimo didn't have that pony tail, it could of been a diffrent scenario..............

[QUOTE]Originally posted by FCFS:
what i think bruce bruce was tring to say is don't be narrow minded and thing karate is the way teakwondo is the way or kung fu is the way. don't give u your style but work on the weaknes your style by that i mean if all your life you trained with your feet you go in the boxing ring your phucked you'll loose or fight on the ground. so then train your weakness so some boxing or some wrestling/BJJ.......thats what bruce lee did........and look whats evolved the no holds bared compitions.... who was efective in the first ufc? royce gracie.

all these masters of there art where loosing to this little bjj man then people started breaking away from there style to learn other styles, they worked on their weakness. you see kimo did prety well aginst royce because learned how to do the basic grappling he learned a few little tricks for the ground, because he knew thats where royce was gonna take him. i'll tell ya if kimo didn't have that pony tail, it could of been a diffrent scenario..............[/QUOTE]

I understand what you are saying, but learning different styles or forms doesn't really make you flexible, probably prepared to a certain degree but neccessarily flexible. We know Bruce did give a care about Japanese Styles, Chinese Styles, etc. but we do know that their are drastic differences and we also know that they are not like JKD, because it can't be personnalized. everyone who does Karate are going to look the same when they perform and that goes especially for all the kung fu type styles, so learning Judo, Karate, and Aikido with a sprinkle of Tai Chi and Muay Thai for power, chi, grapple, and speed doesn't neccessarily make you flexible just prepared for fighters who have studied those arts. Now for instance a fighter of Pi Quan comes at this guy or kempo, he's screwed becaused the scenerios he has learned don't apply to the movements of these martial artist. I didn't see the fight that you mentioned but I am familiar with UFC and my opinion is if you want to survive it learn Muay Thai, Judo, and Tai Chi (explosive power, grapple, and control of ones energy), because most of the fighters take Muay Thai/Kickboxing or some grapple art. JKD on the other hand is different because it is flexible and what i mean by flexible is that everyone who does JKD are going to have subtle differences. I know a spin kick will look like a spin kick and a backfist will look like a backfist, but their are no scenerios just training. Their JKD artist who are just awesome with the "modified" Wing Chun stuff and their are people like me who take the "Intercepting Fist" literally by not wasting time playing hand games and just attacking and counterattacking, you may not call it JKD but the thing is that one must have an open mind when dealing with JKD, because if I had my way I would say to the people who put heavy emphasis on Wing Chun that they are crystallizing JKD but I have to keep an open mind. That is what I think Bruce was trying to show the world an art that is like a virus, it never dies but never stays the same either. I hope that didn't sound to confusing.

i truly understand bro, martial art is an open minded thing. it was ufc 3 [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]

Lee talked a lot about JKD not being a style, only a boat, a finger pointing to the moon, etc.

In spite of all that, he did teach specific techniques that, at least in the Oakland JKD school, were called JKD. Others have called this Jun Fan, but it wasn't called this at the Oakland school in the early 70's before the death of James Yimm Lee.

I think this was done in an attempt to identify frauds. Bruce was concerned over bogus JKD instructors, so, it doesn't surprise me that he wrote about JKD as only being a philosophy, while teaching his students the real system.

Prior to Bruce's death, he wasn't happy with what was going on at the Chinatown school and had Inosanto shut it down. He didn't close Oakland or Seattle, just Chinatown. At that time, it was no secret that Bruce was not happy with Inosanto...something that is echoed by Linda Lee.

However, time has passed and people forget, and Inosanto can rewrite history...and has. To his credit, he has followed the spoken philosophy of JKD...but, other than being a skilled teacher and a student of Lee's, he is doing nothing different from countless others that have never actually trained in JKD and claim to know Bruce Lee's true intent. Born out of this is a legacy of "concepts" instructors where anyone can claim to be teaching/learning JKD regardless of the material.

Further, when the obvious discrepancies are pointed out by those that know, they are met with responses such as "JKD is only a name, don't fuss over it." Of course this brings us full circle to the beginning. It's an interesting response considering this was one of the ways the founder of JKD kept it from being hijacked by charlatans in the first place.

Yes, Jeet Kune Do is a name and a philosophy. It is a system of fighting too. Those that reject this fact, or choose to ignore it, are either ignorant charlatans or have been taught wrong.

see ive had the honor to work with daniel inosanto and he kept telling me this,

"reject what is useless, accept what is usefull and add that what is truely your own. this is Jeet Kune Do."

now im not ghoing to argue with him because if anyones gonna know its him.

That too it allso true, and let me tell you theres allot off sshit in alot of styles, that i've seen. i say be yourself and adapt your combat tools to your own attributes.

Picking and choosing what you want to use sort warps the point of practice MAs, don't you think. I mean isn't get through trials and tribualtions the point of practicing MAs? I see what Inosanto meant but JKD is about being fluid and flexible not really about rejecting and accepting, a little bit, but not totally.

yeah man for sure, fluid and flexible. thats why you need to cross train, to be flexible. thats what lee figured out. a punch is a punch a kick is a kick.......

That's all well and good. But, JKD is a system, albeit a flexible one, but it is still a system. There is a core that, no matter what your own JKD contains, it still requires the core to be JKD.

[QUOTE]I see what Inosanto meant but JKD is about being fluid and flexible not really about rejecting and accepting, a little bit, but not totally. [/QUOTE]

that is what he meant, you cannot be fluid if something doesnt work for you, hense "reject what is useless", the more something works for you the more fluid you can be, hense "accept what is usefull and add what is specificaly your own".

go here - "inosanto.com"

[This message has been edited by alf182 (edited 01-17-2005).]

Have to disagree with you, DrewCQC.

JKD is more of a mindset or philosophy than a codified system.

If you are refering to the 26 "core arts" of JKD, I believe that Bruce did not mean for people to literally use those. I think it was more along the lines of, "These are what I use to have flexabilty in combat, and you need to find what combination works for you."

My "core arts" of JKD would be (and are) different.

If I have mis-interpreted you, I apologize, but I don't see what other "core" you might be talking about as far as a JKD "system".

remember folks, in order for bruce to be a better fighter, flexible fighter, he had to cross train. get away from the tradition of wing chung, an learn how to box, grapple, and i think at that time the world of martial arts was shocked at his new found belief. even chuck norris a full conctact karate champion. studied bruces ways.

i think the way 2 beat any way of fighting is 2 under stand why and how the came across this way of doin it. i feel tht the way bruce went out 2 create the best way of fighting is gd but i feel there will always be something tht could be done to make it better. does any 1 here agree??

of course, things can be done more effective more efficiently. like the book bruce lees fighting method vol 1 on self defence, and its very simple and straight forward, none of this 5 or 10 techniques just to accomplish on task.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by DrewCQC:
That's all well and good. But, JKD is a system, albeit a flexible one, but it is still a system. There is a core that, no matter what your own JKD contains, it still requires the core to be JKD.[/QUOTE]

Actually, he is more on the money than a lot of people professing the JKD name. The martial art formulated by Bruce Lee contained Wing Chun, Western Boxing, and Western Fencing as it's most direct core. AS he adapted other tactics ( not techniques ...but tactics ) into his personal fighting system, it became more solidified into a fighting method that was tailored to the way he believed his fighting skills could best be expressed in combat.

If certain elements ( not techniques )of the "core" system are not present, then one is not doing Jeet Kune Do. You well may be doing a mixed martial art that has progressed you into another level of understanding conflict, which allows you the freedom of expression to defy barriers to win at all costs, and overcome mindsets resistant to outside influence, but you technically are not doing The Way of the Intercepting Fist.

The thing that I find most commical of discussions of this type is that there are a majority that want to be JKD without being JKD. They want to continue the Journey of Sijo Lee and they defy the established path and challenge the established instructors. They want to be different and Original... Just like all the other Different and Original people out there.

There is NO SUCH THING as an original fighting system correlating to empty handed combat. It has all been done before and no matter what one calls it... It is the same thing in a different wrapper. All Lee did was to expose that the martial arts of his time as becomming too complicated so they could sell the "fantasy" of Martial arts.

Before the reformations that doomed the military class in japan, if one were to look at the way they fought...It would be a lot like Lee's philosophy...Same thing in China.
Whatever worked and was most efficient was the order of the day. Only after, when they ( the soldiers) were out of work and had to start selling their skills to the masses did things get overly messy...Because the real stuff could be taught in five minutes (exageration) and could be practiced a lifetime. No money in that.

So instead of going over the same old thing again and again about what JKD is and isn't and who is preaching the real gospel ( go to martial talk dot com, Defend dot net, or any umpteenth martial arts site where this has been done to death...), why don't we talk about what YOU have done with the JKD skills or influenced skills that you have learned and where you plan on taking them? What about how you plan to abandon JKD alltogether and branch out in a new direction (new to you of course...others may be doing the same as you without you knowing it).

JKD offers us a lot of freedom. WHat are you going to do with your's ???

Regards,
Walt


[This message has been edited by kroh (edited 02-14-2005).]

well said bro

Thank you...

Regards,
Walt

I do agree somewhat with the statements here but disagree with some too, alot of people fall into the if your doing this your doing jkd, if your doing that your doing jkd. Plain and simple jkd was bruce's expression of the martial arts his way of fighting, the reason he said jkd was fluid was because jkd is not a kata based system where you must learn the kata a certain way , the footwork is what he called " alive footwork" like a boxer and fencer not like a karate or kung fu practicioner where the norm was strong static stances. But yes jkd did and does have a curriculum of techniques you must learn in order to progress classically the old schools had about 13 techniques they could teach , then bruce added 31 dif grappling sequences and this is quoted from Gary Hartsell. The meaning was you first learn the way then you would be free to utelize the tools in a free form way but bruce was in no way impliing that jkd was JUST a philosophy or he would have never established schools The curriculum among other things was tool development( punching, kicking) trapping drills/energy drills strategy and the sparring.Fisrt learn the way then you will be free to utilize it as you see fit.To make it a personal expression of yourself.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by FCFS:
remember folks, in order for bruce to be a better fighter, flexible fighter, he had to cross train. get away from the tradition of wing chung, an learn how to box, grapple, and i think at that time the world of martial arts was shocked at his new found belief.[/QUOTE]

This is only because Bruce Lee failed to finish his Wing Chun learning with Wong Shun Leung (who repeatedly said that Lee was nothing special among his students). Wing Chun is full of locks, take-downs and grapple techniques because Wing Chun is a concept not a style...you take what is useful to you and discard what is not. Lee's philosophy was simply new to US martial arts, but it is not anything different to what Wing Chun is about - nor are his metaphors about being like water, these are metaphors that can be found in Wing Chun teachings and Chinese fighting philosophies that are hundreds of years old...Lee simply came across them himself because he didn't finish his learning from Wong Shun Leung (arguably the best known fighter). Bruce Lee did distill many concepts into short "sayings", and they have proved useful in communicating the concepts to a new audience.

It is all very well to say "be free and formless", but you can only become so after you have trained hard and conditioned your body to automatically produce the "perfect" shapes. Once you can say "i've got it", then you can discard it and become free, loose, formless. There is no point in trying to be formless and "breaking the rules", if you have failed to learn the rules, understand the concepts, and condition the body to make most efficient use of your personal body mechanics. The forms and drills in Wing Chun are not to be use in fighting, they are to condition the body and to learn how the body should move - Chi Sao is to try to teach you to maintain your structure and lack of tension when you are under stress.

What you describe about JKD is not much different to what I have seen people discuss here already. JKD was Bruce Lee's interpretation of fighting, stemming from his partial understanding of Wing Chun concepts...it is not some revelation, except that it was new to the stylistic arts in the US. If you look at the core of his concepts, they are all Wing Chun based - punch technique, use of hips, elbow positions, non-telegraphic attacks, economy of motion, his stance etc. He incorporated individual concepts from other fighting styles that he personally found useful - but this is a Wing Chun concept! Wong Shun Leung was doing this well before Bruce Lee. You do not ever "finish" Wing Chun, because the concept means you should be continuously looking to improve yourself by searching for the weaknesses and strengths in your own fighting and those of others.

Wong Shun Leung famously said - "The best self defence is to be invisible. If you cannot be, learn Wing Chun"

i agree with you partially someotherguy, he did not finish his wing chun training, he only learned the first two forms not BIU GEE but alot of the concepts he learned were from other arts as well not just wing chun, the non telegraphic attack he learned from western fencing(epee) and his stance was a modified boxing/fencing stance, and the claim that he was nothing special among his students master William Cheung and Yip Man himself have said that Bruce was an exceptional student dilligent and a quick learner, also it is a well known fact that master Leung is known for exagurating things and twisting stories to his advantage.

non-telegraphic attack is a fundamental principle of Wing Chun, even if it is shared with numerous sword arts. From the videos of fights I have seen Bruce Lee in, he uses a stance seen in Wing Chun, although I do know that he also employed fencing concepts. But including aspects of other arts that are of benefit, is once again a Wing Chun concept (even if Lee was never communicated this during his training).

I also doubt that Leung would lie, and intentionally play down his opinion of Bruce Lee, when they had quite a close relationship. He didn't say Bruce Lee was not good, just that he wasn't a stand-out student of his.




[This message has been edited by someotherguy (edited 04-25-2005).]

who is master Leung ?

i'm not so into the whole master idea. because i believe that anything that's going to work in a real fight you can learn in a very small amount of time and be effective to. i believe that for the most part that there's only a few punches and kicks that's going to work well in a real fight. and also i think you should be very mobile and stepping backwards i've learned by watching fight's is for the most part a bad idea because as soon as you step back the other fighter charges in on you or they punch or kick right when you step so that you fall very easy. a bit off topic but sorry. but yeah i think jkd is effective. i think you can use it to apply to any style. for your fighting to be effective i agree with bruce lee that it should be very simple and mobile also i agree with everything bruce had to say on how to survive a fight.