Tao of JKD

Posted by: dragon_tail

Tao of JKD - 05/12/05 01:35 AM

My first post here
I've been doing JFJKD for almost 2 years now, and i was wondering how many people actually take Tao of JKD as a serious reference manual, as in, really read the stuff and try to apply. I'm asking because most of the people (excluding my sifu) say it's just a book and sohuldn't be taken seriously. But i actually read stuff like "tools", etc which contain a lot of usefull info, not just on the ones mindset, but actual techinque, footwork,etc.
So who's with me
Posted by: etaks86

Re: Tao of JKD - 05/12/05 02:09 AM

well since the book was wrote by the man that created jkd then yeah i would have to say that everything in the book should go hand in hand with your jkd training but that's my opinion. i mean tao of jkd was wrote by lee the founder and creater of jkd , i mean it's lee explaining jkd. so i would say that if your studying jkd then that book the tao of jkd should be your guide to jkd. anyway peace be with you
Posted by: etaks86

Re: Tao of JKD - 05/12/05 02:18 AM

yeah i read that last post wrong and had to edit it. anyway i hope you do well in your study of jkd. but like i said before i think if someone is studying jkd then tao of jkd should be their guide.
Posted by: Fluid_Motion

Re: Tao of JKD - 05/14/05 02:53 PM

the book wasn't written by him. he had no intention of publishing his notes.
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Tao of JKD - 05/14/05 03:48 PM

Quote:

the book wasn't written by him. he had no intention of publishing his notes.




It doesn't MATTER whether he intended on publishing it or not - those were his THOUGHTS. It would seem to carry even MORE weight considering that those were his inner/private revelations.

-John
Posted by: Fluid_Motion

Re: Tao of JKD - 05/14/05 04:10 PM

Those were his thoughts, yes. However, it's still not clear what part of those notes he actually used for himself. Like the grappling notes for example: Bruce did seem to have a taking for grappling, but what direction was he going to take that interest in?

Don't get me wrong; I like the book as much as the next person, but then again I actually train in JKD, whereas most people start reading the tao off the bat, and might get the wrong idea.

The truth is that he didn't write it; those were his notes, notes taken directly from other sources. It was compiled by a man named Gilbert Johnson.
Posted by: DragonFire1134

Re: Tao of JKD - 05/14/05 05:36 PM

there is also a much larger book, known as Jeet Kune Do, compiled by John Little. Little was given permission to go through lee's notes at his estate and compile them in a way that makes as much sense as possible. Its a great read.
Posted by: etaks86

Re: Tao of JKD - 05/15/05 01:23 AM

either way i would feel better learning it from his thoughts from his book and not from some person that is teaching and didn't learn it from lee or any of his students. i don't think someone has to learn from a teacher or "master" to be good at self defence. but that's my opinon. i think learning ma that take years to be good at are not the most effective way of fighting in the streets, i think to be good at defending yourself on the streets, buying a boxing bad and sparring with people will teach you how to defend yourself just fine. but adding a few simple moves from some styles that are somewhat effective is a good idea to. if you were ok at boxing then you could add some other simple moves and make your way of fighting even better like take your boxing and add a side kick, front and side low kick from wing chun, add some of the basic blocking and punching from wing chun, maybe add a few moves from karate that are effective in street fighting, and there you have it, the mobilty and basic of boxing with some effective wing chun and karate moves and that's in my opinon a good self defence art. anyway i'm sure that some may not agree but nevertheless it's my opinon and i know that some people or many people may not have the same views as i do and that's cool i'm just throwing in my opinon. and also keep in mind i did not say that ma that take years to learn are not effective at all i just said that in my opinon there's more effective ways of fighting that do not take near as long to learn. also i'm not saying that you shouldn't learn those kind of ma, if they make you happy then go ahead or for health or whatever reason. but i do think that many ma are not simple enough to work well in self defence, i mean a few of the grabs and moves of that nature are i think effective if someone is holding you then yeah i can see some moves in the traditional arts working like that. but if your both free of each other and are about to have a fight then i think that something simple like a mix of boxing, basic wing chun, and a few karate moves would be more effective then learning a whole style that takes years to get anywhere in. also i think if someone wants to learn how to fight they should learn something very simple that gets them at least ok results in less then a few months because they do not need to learn how to fight for a few years from now they need to be able to fight at least ok as soon as they can. but anyway i really hope that people do not get mad or anything at me beacause that's not what i'm wanting to do at all. i'm just wanting to share my opinons about fighting with other people. because you can disagree with me but i will take no offence to that and i will not get mad. i just wanted to point out that i'm respectfully saying these things not to offend just to share and i'm sure you will all do the same as well. so thanks and peace.
Posted by: etaks86

Re: Tao of JKD - 05/15/05 01:31 AM

dragonfire yeah that sounds good i mean it being compiled by john little. i have not read that book yet but i think i might it sounds like a good book for jkd. thanks
Posted by: etaks86

Re: Tao of JKD - 05/15/05 01:38 AM

jkogas thanks for agreeing with me on tao of jkd. i agree with you that it does not matter if he had the intentions of the book being published or not. it still remains that the thoughts came from him on jkd. thanks and peace.
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Tao of JKD - 05/15/05 12:53 PM

The Tao was a good book on JKD. The biggest reason it was such a good book though is that it gave you insight to a man's inner thoughts and how they afected his lifestyle. It helped you understand why he did some of the things he did or said the things he said. With so much about Bruce's life thats contreversial and debatable, its the one really solid thing to go by.
Posted by: etaks86

Re: Tao of JKD - 05/15/05 08:33 PM

yes i agree. for people that understand jkd or that don't but keep an open mind then this book is in my opinon a must for anyone wanting to learn jkd or use it as a guide to how they fight with someother style. anyway peace to all
Posted by: 64445

Re: Tao of JKD - 09/02/05 10:29 PM

people, jkd is just a word. it wasnt ment to mean anything. that is why bruce closed his schools. he didnt believe in styles.

if there is useful information in any book, and you can put it into action effectivly, then there is validity there.

as far as bruces book being a bible for so called rip off jkd stylists that use bruces name for monentary gain. these guys are dicks anyway. they should call it somthing other than that cause bruce would turn over in his grave. they should call it somthing to the effect, the interpertations of bruce lees teachings. not jeet kune do.

i thouroughly loved his book and wished that it was more complete.

i expecually like the theory of the 5 ways of attack.

these things werent meant to be a how to book but just a list of notes on remedies to certian ailments that bruce lee believed existed in the martial arts world, he would call it a cure to a desease. it is a philosophy.
Posted by: otobeawanker

Re: Tao of JKD - 09/03/05 02:38 AM

I own a copy pf the book in question. I am not concerned with the how or why the book was created. I am only concerned with the information inside.

As I study "all style", I have found the book very useful, not only in technique but also philosophy.

One of my favorite techniques from that book is the corkscrew hook. I have found it rather useful in sparring. It’s a technique that wasn't taught to me at any JKD school. I learned it purely out of that book.

Yes I take that book as a serious and creditable reference to Martial Arts.
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Tao of JKD - 09/03/05 09:47 AM

Quote:

Those were his thoughts, yes. However, it's still not clear what part of those notes he actually used for himself.




??? Are we to assume that Lee’s own revelations aren’t pertinent to JKD philosophy? Are we to assume that Lee didn’t understand where he was headed with his OWN philosophy?? Maybe we should take the lesser known instructors notions more seriously than we are to take the founder of the whole movement.

Yeah…that makes sense.

Quote:


Like the grappling notes for example: Bruce did seem to have a taking for grappling, but what direction was he going to take that interest in?




It’s pretty clear when you take into consideration that his top students (Larry Hartsell for example) said that Lee wanted to pursue training more like the MMA that we do today. Hartsell is a pretty legit ‘source’ of JKD I’d say.

I think anyone with HALF a brain, understands that to “float in totality” requires the understanding of grappling – because grappling is a ‘part’ of that totality. To ignore grappling is to merely float in partiality. That would COMPLETELY go against what JKD is, at its essence, all about.

Why does the truth of this simple fact seem to elude so many?

Quote:


Don't get me wrong; I like the book as much as the next person, but then again I actually train in JKD, whereas most people start reading the tao off the bat, and might get the wrong idea.




Same here. My brother in law was a student of Larry Hartsell way back in the day. That was in the early ‘70’s in Charlotte, North Carolina – one of THREE places in the world at the time, which was a legitimate source of JKD training.

Quote:


The truth is that he didn't write it; those were his notes, notes taken directly from other sources. It was compiled by a man named Gilbert Johnson.




That’s completely irrelevant to the truth with which those notes contained.

No, the TRUTH is that he DID in fact write those notes. Regardless of whom they were compiled by. Wouldn’t that ultimately be more important? I suppose not, if you have some sort of agenda – as so MANY “JKD” guys seem to have.

Its seems that for so many, the quest of JKD is to firmly establish what JKD is to them, onto everyone else. Agendas abound. The only problem is that, their quest concerns more about POLITICS than actual training. That sounds EXACTLY like what is happening with your instructor.

-John
Posted by: foreverrocker

Re: Tao of JKD - 10/08/05 11:15 AM

I read it like 15 years ago and it confused the hell out of me. I personally say, throw it out. The reason, I think that Bruce did not want to spread this around is because it would limit our minds to what he wrote. He changed things constantly and the Tao would be a 100% bunch of different notes today.
Posted by: mike_p

Re: Tao of JKD - 11/16/05 11:08 AM

It is true that Tao of JKD book was taken from some of Lee's notes, edited and published. The book alone cannot give you an idea of what all that Bruce had developed for himself. For instance, there is a small note that reads "defense: sticking hands" and gives zero about how Bruce applied sticking in combat. If a person is trying to learn a self defense method, this book is not the best way to do so. It is good reference on some of his thoughts, opinions, and a look at some techniques he had gotten from other sources.
Posted by: RavenG4

Re: Tao of JKD - 01/06/06 11:54 AM

Quote:

either way i would feel better learning it from his thoughts from his book and not from some person that is teaching and didn't learn it from lee or any of his students. i don't think someone has to learn from a teacher or "master" to be good at self defence. but that's my opinon. i think learning ma that take years to be good at are not the most effective way of fighting in the streets, i think to be good at defending yourself on the streets, buying a boxing bad and sparring with people will teach you how to defend yourself just fine. but adding a few simple moves from some styles that are somewhat effective is a good idea to. if you were ok at boxing then you could add some other simple moves and make your way of fighting even better like take your boxing and add a side kick, front and side low kick from wing chun, add some of the basic blocking and punching from wing chun, maybe add a few moves from karate that are effective in street fighting, and there you have it, the mobilty and basic of boxing with some effective wing chun and karate moves and that's in my opinon a good self defence art. anyway i'm sure that some may not agree but nevertheless it's my opinon and i know that some people or many people may not have the same views as i do and that's cool i'm just throwing in my opinon. and also keep in mind i did not say that ma that take years to learn are not effective at all i just said that in my opinon there's more effective ways of fighting that do not take near as long to learn. also i'm not saying that you shouldn't learn those kind of ma, if they make you happy then go ahead or for health or whatever reason. but i do think that many ma are not simple enough to work well in self defence, i mean a few of the grabs and moves of that nature are i think effective if someone is holding you then yeah i can see some moves in the traditional arts working like that. but if your both free of each other and are about to have a fight then i think that something simple like a mix of boxing, basic wing chun, and a few karate moves would be more effective then learning a whole style that takes years to get anywhere in. also i think if someone wants to learn how to fight they should learn something very simple that gets them at least ok results in less then a few months because they do not need to learn how to fight for a few years from now they need to be able to fight at least ok as soon as they can. but anyway i really hope that people do not get mad or anything at me beacause that's not what i'm wanting to do at all. i'm just wanting to share my opinons about fighting with other people. because you can disagree with me but i will take no offence to that and i will not get mad. i just wanted to point out that i'm respectfully saying these things not to offend just to share and i'm sure you will all do the same as well. so thanks and peace.




I agree with this. In the book it talks about his philosophy about taking what works for you and making it your own. If you are good boxer for example, learn a few blocking and kicking moves and maybe throw in a little grappling and be done with it. Learn those and be proficient in them because when the time comes to use them you want them to be second nature to you. Like it's stated in the book, like in real life you do take what you feel works for you and make it your own. Samething with MA. That is the "concept" and "Philosophy" of JKD.
Posted by: blackbrujo

Re: Tao of JKD - 03/11/06 12:54 PM

Often in Tao, I remember that they are, after all, Lee's personal notes. Good for insight into his thinking process, but still not good for anyone really but him. If you were a history professor, would you want someone to publish your spiral notebook as an official history text book?
Posted by: QuietGal

Re: Tao of JKD - 03/11/06 05:18 PM


Only if the book INCLUDED my drawings of people skiing within my notes and my horrible spelling mistakes!
Posted by: OneInchPunchMaster

Re: Tao of JKD - 03/12/06 04:25 AM

Tao of JKD is a great book. You can get a better insight into JKD and its philosophy. It also shows you some of the mechanics for doing certain kicks and punches with more power and effectiveness. You'll find the book great.
Posted by: UnknownFighter

Re: Tao of JKD - 07/07/07 12:23 AM

you say you train in jkd but if you knew what lee was trying to teach, it is that jkd isn't a style or method. Jeet kune do is a way of total physical fitness and a way to become good in the combat arts. He taught how to train physical aspects of your body but the only training of martial arts was that you should use any combat move that is useful to you. He taught not to choose a style, but to take the useful and discard the useless.
Posted by: skinters

Re: Tao of JKD - 05/26/08 06:31 AM

the tao of jkd is just a collection of thoughts and ideas bruce lee was going through at the time anything from boxing to fencing there are a lot of references to fencing in there and well as boxing wich was taking out of an army boxing manual a lot of what was in there was of course bruce lees own notes of wich some were found crumpled up in a drawer typical of him eh ?...think thats in the front of the book somewhere .

ive read the book myself and taken what i needed out of it so take what you need dont worship it and like his wife linda said after youve read it use the pages for the bottom of your birdcage

jase

please pardon my incoherence and poor penmanship .
Posted by: BruceLee94

Re: Tao of JKD - 05/28/08 10:07 AM

The great thing with the Tao of JKD is that i just keep going back to it. It has a lot of good philosophies in it, and has lots of good information. The only bad thing i can see with it is that a lot of it is in Cantonese, which is fine if you can read Cantonese, but if you can't (most of us), then you will probably miss out on quite a bit of information.