JKD Phillosophy and art

[kanik]

Hey im wondering would somone be considered following jeet kune do if they followed the principles but never trained in the art? Like bruce allways said being confined to one art isnt good but isnt that what JKD is? One art? But yeh my question, is following the principles and ideas good enough to say that you are learning as how bruce was teaching? I was thinking of it while reading some stuff about bruce lee and thinking of all the arts i've personnally trained in and what i've done with them. well yeh all thoughts appreciated.

[The_Judo_Jibboo]

Originally Posted by kanik

Like bruce allways said being confined to one art isnt good but isnt that what JKD is? One art?

yup, an irony that was not lost on Bruce.
if you're using Bruce's philosophy to train, you can certainly say you're following his teachings, but not necessarily that you're doing JKD.

[Tim McFatridge]

Originally Posted by kanik

Hey im wondering would somone be considered following jeet kune do if they followed the principles but never trained in the art? Like bruce allways said being confined to one art isnt good but isnt that what JKD is? One art? But yeh my question, is following the principles and ideas good enough to say that you are learning as how bruce was teaching? I was thinking of it while reading some stuff about bruce lee and thinking of all the arts i've personnally trained in and what i've done with them. well yeh all thoughts appreciated.

The answer to your question in short...NO. You may follow Bruce Lee's philosophy and you may apply his philosophy to your own art or arts that you train in or have trained in...BUT this does not mean that you follow, train in or do JKD. It may be your JKD but it is not the JKD that Bruce Lee taught, created or trained. There is only one way to be considered a follower of Bruce Lee's JKD and that is to train and study JKD. Bruce Lee's JKD consist of more than one art. In the early years you had Bruce Lee's Chinese Gung Fu, then later you had Jun Fan Gung Fu (Bruce Lee Gung Fu) which is a mixture of the arts that Bruce studied while in China and the arts he studied here in America. After Bruce was in America he studied Western Boxing, Kickboxing and Grappling (under Wally Jay and Gene LeBell), then you had Jeet Kune Do (L.A. years).

You can not completely understand JKD unless you train in Bruce Lee's art and first learn and understand Jun Fan as the base/core of JKD. In Jun Fan/JKD everything has economy of motion and everything has a reason behind why they are done.

[g-bells]

thats the misconception of alot of people, no offence to you , but just because you apply his philosiphy doen't mean that you are doing jkd.
jkd does have a foundation and it's from there were you make it your own, find your own way not the way of your instructor or even bruce lee. one needs to find what works best for him/her and apply it to their training. it may take a life time to find your way, but the journey will be beautiful

[The_Judo_Jibboo]

modern JKD practitioners tend to forget that toward the end of his life Bruce was phasing out the use of the term Jeet Kune Do.

"Because Lee felt the system he called Jun Fan Gung Fu was too restrictive, it was transformed to what he would come to describe as Jeet Kune Do or the Way of the Intercepting Fist, a term he would later regret because Jeet Kune Do implied specific parameters that styles connotate whereas the idea of the martial art was to exist outside of parameters and limitations."

That's off wikipedia, not the most reliable source i know but i just wanted something quick to quote. i've read this same thing in other biographies, and it was mentionned in a great biography the history channel did on him.

he spent so much of his time telling people to do it the way that worked for them, then he died and everyone yells "let's all do it like Bruce used to!"

[g-bells]

Originally Posted by The_Judo_Jibboo

modern JKD practitioners tend to forget that toward the end of his life Bruce was phasing out the use of the term Jeet Kune Do.

"Because Lee felt the system he called Jun Fan Gung Fu was too restrictive, it was transformed to what he would come to describe as Jeet Kune Do or the Way of the Intercepting Fist, a term he would later regret because Jeet Kune Do implied specific parameters that styles connotate whereas the idea of the martial art was to exist outside of parameters and limitations."

That's off wikipedia, not the most reliable source i know but i just wanted something quick to quote. i've read this same thing in other biographies, and it was mentionned in a great biography the history channel did on him.

he spent so much of his time telling people to do it the way that worked for them, then he died and everyone yells "let's all do it like Bruce used to!"

his principals that he developed needed to be called something for others to be able to relate to. there is a stance, ways of attack, the use of your stronger side, use of your closest weapon towards your opponent, etc...
that being said it's up to each individual to develop from there in his/her own way, but the foundation needs to be clear, and any repitable instructor will incourage that and in my oppinion thats what bruce would've expected out of his art

[tel]

i believe that you should learn jfjkd as a base, then you can add other arts.
tho this is no longer jfjkd, but your expression of jkd, and therefore should be named something different

[John McNabney]

Originally Posted by The_Judo_Jibboo

"Because Lee felt the system he called Jun Fan Gung Fu was too restrictive, it was transformed to what he would come to describe as Jeet Kune Do

Sorry but this is not a true statement as fact. Bruce Lee never called what he did "Jun Fan Gung Fu", his school had that name. Guro Dan Inosanto called it that after Bruce Lee's untimely death. This was because he promised not to teach it to the general public...

[kanik]

wow im hearing a lot of contradictions here... but isnt it true that bruce ment for jeet kune do to be a concept and not an art? I am not asking if it means i am training in JKD but what im asking is that would it be enough to say, considering i am following the principles, that i am following the phillosophy and not the art of JKD? Coz like yeh its a great art, but thats exactly what it is now-a-days, an art, and no one ever looks at it like the phillosophy anymore.

[The_Judo_Jibboo]

Originally Posted by kanik

wow im hearing a lot of contradictions here... but isnt it true that bruce ment for jeet kune do to be a concept and not an art? I am not asking if it means i am training in JKD but what im asking is that would it be enough to say, considering i am following the principles, that i am following the phillosophy and not the art of JKD? Coz like yeh its a great art, but thats exactly what it is now-a-days, an art, and no one ever looks at it like the phillosophy anymore.

i think you'd do well to look at more of his writings and a good biography of him and decide for yourself, but personally i find it fairly obvious that Bruce himself would have said yes, you can follow the philosophy without your style of fighting looking anything like his.

[CorySmith]

Here is the issue. If you are following the philosophy, what are you using as the source of such? The reason why I ask is that if the source is what you've read in books (or other forms of media), there is a huge fundamental flaw in using that as your *only* resource.

For one, it has been made available that some of the information contained within the books that are available are inaccurate. (Just talk to Dan Inosanto... he was there... he helped create the term Jeet Kune Do and he has pointed out that some of the information contained in the latest batch of books has some inaccuracies. This is not the main point, just one to keep in mind.)

The biggest issue is that trying to learn an art solely by reading a book just doesn't work. Yes, there is great material in books and I find them a very valuable resource, but... they shouldn't be the only resource - they are an additional resource above and beyond training with a reputable instructor. You need to train with someone in order to a) see it in action and b) experience the finer nuances that might or rather most likely not be included in the book.

Also, the books that are currently available have one *HUGE* fundamental flaw. And yes, this means *ALL* books available that claim to be Bruce Lee's notes. The flaw is that you are reading someone else's interpretation and collective grouping of Bruce Lee's notes so that it makes for good reading. What the authors have done is taken Bruce Lee's notes and categorized them into chapters; excluding notes that don't fit in with the authors vision. Bruce Lee's original notes are just that... *NOTES*. What is needed is to have someone write a book that takes Bruce Lee's notes in cronological order and then add their own thoughts (or rather the thoughts of those that have trained with Bruce Lee) as anotations to the notes. This, however, does not exist and I doubt that it will ever exist; which is completely unfortunate as that right there would help to put to rest much of the confusion surrounding Jeet Kune Do.

Because such a set of books does not exist, all you are doing is taking someone elses interpretation of Bruce Lee's notes, how they categorized them and how they see each note as being important and trying to attach that to your personal martial art. The issue being that you don't know when one thought was made versus another; or when one thought may have superseded another.

Training with those that have trained with Bruce Lee and those whom have trained with those people accordingly helps you get this information and is the only way you can get a more complete picture of what Bruce Lee was trying to do.

It is also important to understand that Bruce Lee's art was constantly evolving, so you must keep that in mind when training with those whom trained with Bruce Lee. All of this information contains pieces to the puzzle. Although it will be impossible to get the "full" picture as Bruce Lee saw it (since the picture was never complete... remember... he was constantly evolving his concepts of martial arts) and the closest that I see to those whom continued what Bruce Lee was doing are Dan Inosanto and Larry Hartsell. They've continued to evolve... heck... they continue to this day to evolve. But... they evolve using the existing knowledge gained by training with Bruce Lee (his ideas, concepts, training methods, etc.) and keep this in mind whenever they train something new. Without this base knowledge and experience, it would be impossible to call what they do Jeet Kune Do.

Yes, it is possible to take some of the ideas garnered through reading such material and apply it to whatever art you are doing. However, if you truly understand Jeet Kune Do, the art that these concepts are applied to would fundamentally change. Wheras learning Jun Fan Gung Fu (as it has become known) which contains a training progression, techniques, etc. helps you understand what Jeet Kune Do is. This does not mean that Jun Fan Gung Fu is Jeet Kune Do. It just means that it is extremely difficult (if not impossible) to understand such concepts without seeing them in action... and having these actions become part of who you are. Once this occurs, you can then expand out from there to other arts (read as techniques) and apply such principles accordingly since you now have a base of comparison.

Here's the deal. If, without ever seeing the color red, how could anyone writing a book, posting to a forum, entering something into wikipedia, etc. ever explain to you what the color of red looks like. Only until you see the color red and have a label attached to it do you understand what the color red is. Ah... but there in exists the ultimate understanding... think about it...

I'll wait...

OK, once you understand that there is this color that is red, you start to find that there are many shades and varieties of the color red. But, you understand that they are all red since you now have a base of comparison. Without a base of comparison, you don't know what to call the color of that liquid that drains out of your nose when you get popped really hard. ;-)

[kanik]

Originally Posted by CorySmith

The biggest issue is that trying to learn an art solely by reading a book just doesn't work. Yes, there is great material in books and I find them a very valuable resource, but... they shouldn't be the only resource - they are an additional resource above and beyond training with a reputable instructor. You need to train with someone in order to a) see it in action and b) experience the finer nuances that might or rather most likely not be included in the book

Yo dude lemme say it one more time, im not interested in the art, so im not trying to learn any art from the bo9oks and writings that i may have, i am interested in the phillosohy, because the art is... well i guess that you could say its an art, a hell awsome none stagnate art, but thats exactly what it is, an art! So anyone else with the wrong idea of what im asking, i dont give a damn about any art in particular, because if it was just the art i am not that much of an idiot not to realise that i cant learn an art from a book, so one more time I like and care about and am asking about the phillosophy of Jeet kune do, not the art that is associated with the phillosophy. I also know that most the books are filled with other peoples views, and thats why i dont go from the books, because my own view whether there right or wrong , are good enough to last me.

[eXcessiveForce]

what you call philosophy others consider art, and what you call art others consider philosophy. For it to be called JKD you can not really have one without the other.

That's what they are telling you. Bruce founded his philosophy on the arts he studied. He took from those arts to create a structure. In this structure he created the idea of an ever adapting art.

Could you come up with an art by simply taking the ideas of Bruce Lee in a vacuum and apply it to any martial arts you encounter? Yes, would that be JKD, most likely it would not resemble what is considered JKD.

I applied many of "bruces Ideas" to other martial arts long before I knew bruce had come up with them. They were a natural and logical conclusion for me, later I realized he had come to the same conclusions. He however had taken them beyond were i did, I was in the theoretical stage and he had applied them.

I have learned much of what JKD as taught by bruce was, and I have added things that work for me, some things bruce himself threw out.


You could try to reinvent the wheel but for what purpose? you may improve that's true, or you may come up with something that is just a pale reflection of what already exists.

[Little Apple]

Now I'm just spitballing here, and I could be wrong, however: it seems to me that the question goes something like,
"I find the philosophy embedded in JKD to be true and meaningful, and was wondering if I could be said to be a follower of the JKD philosophies?"

Then the answer goes, "Well, that's a little misleading because the philosophies are connected to an art, so you're better off not misrepresenting yourself there."

"I'm not claiming to do the art, I'm just interested in applying the principles to everything, isn't that JKD too?"

"Well, a lot of people get confused about that, but JKD is a name for the complete package. You're free to use the philosophies in whatever way you choose, Bruce would probably be OK with that, just be careful of what you call things."

Again, I'm just spitballing here, but I would say you'd be safer to say something like "I'm studying the philosophies of Bruce Lee" than "I'm a philosophical practitioner of JKD." I know it seems like a stupid distinction, but there are SO many misrepresentations and rip-offs, that being accurate is important. And try not to get up tight if the guys are defensive of JKD, it can be a huge point of contention. Plus in some circles JKD needs defending. Anyway, that's my two bits.
Peace out.

[Troll Virus]

Originally Posted by Little Apple

Now I'm just spitballing here, and I could be wrong, however: it seems to me that the question goes something like,
"I find the philosophy embedded in JKD to be true and meaningful, and was wondering if I could be said to be a follower of the JKD philosophies?"

Then the answer goes, "Well, that's a little misleading because the philosophies are connected to an art, so you're better off not misrepresenting yourself there."

"I'm not claiming to do the art, I'm just interested in applying the principles to everything, isn't that JKD too?"

"Well, a lot of people get confused about that, but JKD is a name for the complete package. You're free to use the philosophies in whatever way you choose, Bruce would probably be OK with that, just be careful of what you call things."

Again, I'm just spitballing here, but I would say you'd be safer to say something like "I'm studying the philosophies of Bruce Lee" than "I'm a philosophical practitioner of JKD." I know it seems like a stupid distinction, but there are SO many misrepresentations and rip-offs, that being accurate is important. And try not to get up tight if the guys are defensive of JKD, it can be a huge point of contention. Plus in some circles JKD needs defending. Anyway, that's my two bits.
Peace out.

Didn't Bruce say "The name is not the thing"?
Why have to say, to anyone, what your definitions are?

The modern concept of MMA (if you regard it as a concept rather than a sport), is to be effective at all ranges and all interspacing transitions.
That, to me, was what Bruces; "absorb what is useful etc" was all about.
There's no 'patent' on that to my knowledge, nor could there ever have been, as it was simply an expression of the equation of progress.
It's no different now, though, perhaps some of the honesty/purity has been lost in mans desire to prove one thing over another