Was this style really suppose to be a style?

[Corporal Hicks]

Gee for a guy confused by the "Tao of JKD" you seem to have nailed it on the head... huh?? :idunno:

I call JKD a philosophy and not a style. Remember that Lee was a major in Philosophy while in college... it stands to reason.

Either way it is a powerful art but I wouldn't go as far as to say it's more powerful than any other. But that's just IMHO

Lol, but is it an art?! IMO JKD does not exist but to the self, there is no JKD, only your own idea of JKD, so I guess I would say everybody's maximum potential is reached from the philosphy and pratice of an idea that could be called 'Jeet Kune Do'. I only say that it is most powerful because nothing can defeat it, when there is nothing to defeat, which really doesnt make sense does it! Its just an idea, something you can grasp and learn from but not something you can pin-down.
Maybe you could see it as being the maximum potential a person 'could' reach through the arts. Ok, so maybe you could say to me 'I disagree, since my own personal art i.e. TKD or BJJ is the best I am good at and I have reached my maximum potential'. But is that really your maximum potential? could you not 'add' a little bit to it, make some defences stronger through some gaps by adapting other arts, or even having knowledge of other arts and applying their ideas. I dont know, I said I was confused since some of the other ideas I could not get my head around, after all Tao Of JKD is simply one man's idea, I'm not in his mind, I'm not his mind, somethings I cannot interpret perhaps as I should!
kind Regards

 

[evenflow1121]

I dont practice JKD, but my friends that do, refer to it as a philosophy. I however, still view it as a system. However, the reason that they state it as a philosophy is because of its openess, take what is most effective for you and use it, but in reality wouldnt that be the same in all styles? I mean no matter what you learn, you will always favor one over the other, either you will favor striking, or grappling, ect and given the circumstances you will do your best to get your opponnent in the most favorable scenario for you.

 

[jkdhit]

according to bruce lee, it's not really a style. he said he named it just for the purpose of having a name so people can recognize it as something. i remember hearing in a recorded interview and reading that he doesn't believe in styles or one way of fighting

 

[Feisty Mouse]

There is Sigung Bruce's philosophy, and there is also what he did, how he approached fighting, what techniques he thought worked best.

I'd say it's both, and that it is not a bad idea to approach learning the techniques, and then (if you have a very good instructor) learning about the philosophy behind what Sigung did.

I honestly don't have a huge amount of patience for the hand-waving "there is no style of JKD!" thing, just my personal reaction. I understand what Sigung was trying to say (I think), but it seems wasteful to me to then dismiss or discard the techniques and training he had, which are based on principles he emphasized.

 

[Marvin]

I honestly don't have a huge amount of patience for the hand-waving "there is no style of JKD!" thing, just my personal reaction. I understand what Sigung was trying to say (I think), but it seems wasteful to me to then dismiss or discard the techniques and training he had, which are based on principles he emphasized.

Feisty, don't think of it as a discarding or dismissal. Think more of an evolution, I remember Dan Inosanto making an analogy of a '67 Corvette vs. a new Corvette; the '67 was great, it was fast, sleek and got the job done, but the modern Vette modern is even better w. power steering, better handling etc.
As well as what Bruce Lee said (I’m paraphrasing here because I can’t remember the quote exactly) “don’t become attached to the technique, which is like a boat used to cross a river; once it is crossed don’t carry the boat on your back.”
That is the beautiful thing about JKD you don't have to be bound buy the techniques of its founder, like so many “styles” of martial art!
Marvin

 

[James Kovacich]

“don’t become attached to the technique, which is like a boat used to cross a river; once it is crossed don’t carry the boat on your back.”
That is the beautiful thing about JKD you don't have to be bound buy the techniques of its founder, like so many “styles” of martial art!
Marvin

Umm, has anyone asked Dan why he hasn't discarded his Jun Fan?
I think the discarding of the technique becomes slightly confused by the wording. Becoming one with our technique and bound by no limitations does not equal a "free for all" which by "many peoples defition," thats what they beleive JKD means.

 

[Marvin]

Akja, I think you misread my post. I said "you don't have to be bound by the techniques of its founder" which is not the same as YOU MUST NOT be bound. As to Jun Fan, you answed your own question. Jun Fan is Jun Fan, not JKD.
Marvin

 

[James Kovacich]

Jun Fan is the root and is taught in the process. Jun Fan may noe be JKD CONCEPTS but is very much a part of JKD.

 

[Marvin]

Jun Fan is the root and is taught in the process. Jun Fan may noe be JKD CONCEPTS but is very much a part of JKD.

Fair enough, what is JKD Concepts and what is JKD?
Marvin

 

[DeLamar.J]

1.Absorb whats useful
2.discard the useless
3.add what is your own.

That is the core philosophy of JKD. Its not a style, its a philosophy of how to train in the arts. Yes bruce had techniques he taught that worked for him, but if you dont like them, than your not supposed to use them.
JKD is a philosophy that is desighned to break herd conformity. Its keeps you neutral, so you can learn from any source, that way your not for, or against any style.

 

[James Kovacich]

1.Absorb whats useful
2.discard the useless
3.add what is your own.

That is the core philosophy of JKD. Its not a style, its a philosophy of how to train in the arts. Yes bruce had techniques he taught that worked for him, but if you dont like them, than your not supposed to use them.
JKD is a philosophy that is desighned to break herd conformity. Its keeps you neutral, so you can learn from any source, that way your not for, or against any style.

Thats fine if you want to beleive that. Bruce and Dan both constantly contradicted everything they said. Why beleive only one side of the coin? The art and the concept are two halves of the whole. Neither are complete without the other.

If what you say is true then ANYONE could teach JKD and there would be NO NEED for people like Dan Inosanto.

If you don't mind. Can you tell me where your theory comes from? I ask this because to many people "read it" or hear it second hand and then preach it like the bible.

The concept works in conjunction with the underlying art. Once the the art is no longer present, "the JKD label" should be "dropped." Give your art the "true" name it deserves and quit confusing the public on "what is" and "what isn't" JKD.

The bulk of knowledge comes from my Sifu who was present during the early years.
http://www.taoofgungfu.com/

 

[DeLamar.J]

Thats fine if you want to beleive that. Bruce and Dan both constantly contradicted everything they said. Why beleive only one side of the coin? The art and the concept are two halves of the whole. Neither are complete without the other.

If what you say is true then ANYONE could teach JKD and there would be NO NEED for people like Dan Inosanto.

If you don't mind. Can you tell me where your theory comes from? I ask this because to many people "read it" or hear it second hand and then preach it like the bible.

The concept works in conjunction with the underlying art. Once the the art is no longer present, "the JKD label" should be "dropped." Give your art the "true" name it deserves and quit confusing the public on "what is" and "what isn't" JKD.

The bulk of knowledge comes from my Sifu who was present during the early years.
http://www.taoofgungfu.com/

I read this information right from Bruce Lees books.

 

[James Kovacich]

I read this information right from Bruce Lees books.

You've proved my point.
I ask this because to many people "read it" or hear it second hand and then preach it like the bible.

You're taking the words from a book and accepting it over the words of MANY instructors who were PRESENT and say differant.


Even though I don't know you, I'd be willing to bet that the book(s) you read were written after Bruces death and by someone else, based on Bruces notes.
The Tao and most all other books were NOT written by Bruce.

There are a small hand full of books that Bruce did write while he was still young and primarily a Wing Chun player and he NEVER wrote about his martial art being a concept or a philosiphy.

If you read any of the later books you'll find that Bruce contradicted himself (over time). This COULD lead someone to beleive that his Gung Fu, the art, is separate from Jeet Kune Do, the concept.

But like everything in JKD it's open to interpetation and the answers are within ourselves BUT our guidance COMES from those that have the TIES to JKD, not from reading the books, as an outsider, an TRYING to make the correct interpetation. That helps confuse the public even more than Bruce did himself.

My Sifu's system is solid and is well respected in the JKD community. It's almost disrespecting to him, his father and everyone else who were there and say differant, to say they just have a concept. :asian:

 

[DeLamar.J]

You've proved my point.
I ask this because to many people "read it" or hear it second hand and then preach it like the bible.

You're taking the words from a book and accepting it over the words of MANY instructors who were PRESENT and say differant.


Even though I don't know you, I'd be willing to bet that the book(s) you read were written after Bruces death and by someone else, based on Bruces notes.
The Tao and most all other books were NOT written by Bruce.

There are a small hand full of books that Bruce did write while he was still young and primarily a Wing Chun player and he NEVER wrote about his martial art being a concept or a philosiphy.

If you read any of the later books you'll find that Bruce contradicted himself (over time). This COULD lead someone to beleive that his Gung Fu, the art, is separate from Jeet Kune Do, the concept.

But like everything in JKD it's open to interpetation and the answers are within ourselves BUT our guidance COMES from those that have the TIES to JKD, not from reading the books, as an outsider, an TRYING to make the correct interpetation. That helps confuse the public even more than Bruce did himself.

My Sifu's system is solid and is well respected in the JKD community. It's almost disrespecting to him, his father and everyone else who were there and say differant, to say they just have a concept. :asian:

Interesting. Im not sure what to say. I dont know anyone who teaches JKD, so all I have is the book store, if thats really not a valid source of info then that really sucks. His name should not be on the books then. Also why doesnt his family come forward with a lawsuit if his books are false?

 

[DeLamar.J]

Also, my favorite book of Bruce Lees is the warrior within, and your right, it was written after his death. But the man who wrote it sounds credible, and im sure someone would be suing if he wasnt.
That book changed my philosophy of martial arts, it was more helpful to me than any martial arts book I have ever read.

 

[Feisty Mouse]

Interesting. Im not sure what to say. I dont know anyone who teaches JKD, so all I have is the book store, if thats really not a valid source of info then that really sucks. His name should not be on the books then. Also why doesnt his family come forward with a lawsuit if his books are false?

Why must it be a black-or-white issue? This sounds very Fundamentalist, which is ironic - with the book-thumping and whatnot.

The books are important. So are the things that Sigung Bruce said, how he trained, what he did and talked about with his students.

 

[James Kovacich]

Interesting. Im not sure what to say. I dont know anyone who teaches JKD, so all I have is the book store, if thats really not a valid source of info then that really sucks. His name should not be on the books then. Also why doesnt his family come forward with a lawsuit if his books are false?

It's not so much wrong. It is just like his art. It is and it isn't. Thats what he left us. Bruce contradicted himself alot.

In those same books by Jon Little from Bruces original notes. In the "Personal Letters that Bruce Lee wrote. You'll find that he wrote a letter to Hawkens Cheung and he was excited about his "new" Gung Fu system. He created a martial art.

IF he later said it was not an art and just a concept, that is what his students disagree on. So one can learn JKD the concept and should learn it with the correct foundation which isn't just anything that one chooses but from an instructor whose been there and can take you there.

 

[James Kovacich]

I have most of those books too and I was buying the Jon Little books as they were coming out. I was buying 2 copies of each and giving one to my Sifu. It was funny because they contradited at times what I was being taught. Then as I read more, it was obvious that the books (Bruces writings) contradicted each other.

The students have there own interpetations of what they were taught and that will be even more differant too. So there isn't a right or wrong. Like Feisty commented, it can't be black or white. It is what it is.

 

[arnisador]

Is he contradicting himself, or is his thinking evolving as time goes on and he gains experience?

 

[James Kovacich]

Is he contradicting himself, or is his thinking evolving as time goes on and he gains experience?

Could be OR maybe he just changed his mind about creating a system. HE did create a system. What happened to it is the evolution.