JKD differences to Wing Chun

dwoolman · 07-30-2001, 07:04 PM

Because there are soo little schools of Jun Fan/JKD I really dont know any major differences between Jun Fan/JKD and Wing Chun? Since this is a JKD discussion forum does any of you know MAJOR differences between the two axcept the stances of course.
I take TaeKwonDo but I really want to take JKD but since there are limited schools in the UK I might go for Wing Chun instead.
So what are the differences between the two?

likuid · 07-31-2001, 11:41 AM

The operative term here is not 'how are they different', it is 'how are they related'...JKD is a philosophical approach to the martial ARTS which by its very virtue includes any martial art you may find 'useful'...whereas Wing Chun is a finite style, totally independent of Jun Fan. Jun Fan was Bruce Lee's original name, so he named 'his' art after himself. Through self exploration in Jun Fan he developed his ideas on Jeet Kune Do. So there are pieces of wing chun in Jun Fan, there is also grappling, boxing, evidence of fencing, and many other arts that Sijo Bruce extracted from.

So i guess, in a nutshell, wing chun is just one ingredient in jun fan.

Khayman · 07-31-2001, 09:19 PM

Differences? What differences? They are only found "in the beginning". JKD, as mentioned, is a very practical approach to the MA in general, but it uses Wing Chun principles... check out the "elbow in" principle and punching with vertical fists. Sure, it does includes boxing and stuffs, but Bruce Lee himself insisted on the vertical fist (based on his background in Wing Chun, which he found has several advantage over the classical horizontal fist).

IMHO, its a relationship. JKD, I would say, is an extension of the system of Wing Chun, but to "learn" JKD without at least an exploration into Wing Chun is just basically "combined arts" approach, which loses its original intent of what JKD is about.

By all means, learn Wing Chun, but keep an open mind. When we say that u liberate from the classical styles, u must have the classical styles to begin with. Learn it, use it, but do not be attached to it.

likuid · 08-01-2001, 09:15 AM

one might say that jun fan, as an art might be an 'extension' of Wing Chun...but, JKD definitely is not an extension of Wing Chun. JKD is a philsophic approach to the martial arts whereas wing chun is a style. You're comparing apples to oranges, philosophically speaking. Wing chun is a base for Jun Fan simply because Yip Man was Bruce Lee's first formal instructor. Bruce started his self exploration from there.

To practice Jun Fan a base in wing chun is very helpful. However, the Toa of JKD does not say one must study Wing Chun, it simply iterates that adaptability is the key, and the individual, not the style is the most important element in martial arts.

Khayman · 08-01-2001, 11:36 AM

have u learnt wing chun to begin with? heehee...... IMHO, u are only approaching the isue in scholarly fashion, i.e. overly technical with the terms. If u actually understand JKD, it is just a name. To quote the book u mentioned, read the very very last paragraph. Similarly, Wing Chun, or Jun Fan, is just a name, not a style etc. but the expression of an individual. The term JKD was coined to differentiate it from a "style", but coining it has become something of a paradox. In MA in general, one needs a "base style" to begin with, if not, what are the inessentials u are chipping away?

likuid · 08-01-2001, 11:48 AM

I don't think I'm being overly technical with the terms. I'm simply saying that i disagree when you say that JKD is an extension of Wing Chun. I do train all of the arts that fall within the 'typical' JKD curriculum. However, i am of the persuasion that one does not have to practice, wing chun, muaythai, kali, silat, etc, in order to practice Jeet Kune Do.

I'm also a little confused when you reference the very last paragraph. you said:

"Similarly, Wing Chun, or Jun Fan, is just a name, not a style etc. but the expression of an individual. The term JKD was coined to differentiate it from a "style", but coining it has become something of a paradox. In MA in general, one needs a "base style" to begin with, if not, what are the inessentials u are chipping away"

I feel your own comments substantiate the notion that JKD is more than a 'style', so it certainly can't just be a mere extension of Wing Chun.

Please don't get me wrong, i agree with most of the stuff you're saying, i'm just hung up on the 'extension of wing chun' thing.

Khayman · 08-02-2001, 12:36 PM

Yup, correct, Being an extension, it alleviates itself to become more than just a style.

To say that JKD is an extension of WC itself is a paradox. It is both true and false at the same time, depending on which angle u look at it. Bruce Lee himself did not complete WC when he arrived in the US in 1958. With what he has, and his own understanding of the martial arts, he is also aware of the limitations of what he has at that point of time. The WC he did, was therefore renamed to Jun Fan because of the improvisations he made to his "incomplete" system. In fact, the "right side forward" of his chi sau was implemented because he has a "weak" left side.

Then later, because of the much publicised duel with Wong JM, he again realised that there is more to it then what he got and set out to do his personal research. JKD was coined to represent his approach and his philosophy. As much as the elimination of the classical mess is concern, most of the princples taught in Wing Chun is retained. In that sense, it is a natural extension of the Wing Chun system.

Yet on the other hand, JKD also offers a fresh new perspective to the MA and combat. Its approach is similar, yet distinctive. In that sense, it is not.

likuid · 08-02-2001, 01:19 PM

we could go on about this forever...your logic obviously renders a different conclusion than mine.

here's an analogy

to say a fully grown oak tree is five feet tall is in itself a paradox.
yes, at one point many years ago its maximum height was in fact five feet - however, it has become much more than that with time and maturity.

additionally, wing chun may have been at the base of bruce lee's jun fan, and ultimately bruce's JKD...however, one does not need to study wing chun to practice JKD...he himself said it is just an idea, not a curriculum. JKD is more about perspective, rather than any prescribed art.

Khayman · 08-02-2001, 01:33 PM

try teaching a kid to run before he can even stand.

likuid · 08-02-2001, 02:15 PM

you're being argumentative, ALL i am saying is that wing chun does not have to be the base for JKD

Khayman · 08-02-2001, 09:00 PM

nope. I didnt even mention that WC have to be a base for JKD. I merely said JKD is an extension of WC.

aseepish · 08-03-2001, 02:22 AM

Likuid: "Wing chun may have been at the base of bruce lee's jun fan, and ultimately bruce's JKD. . . "

The question now is what is at the base of Wing Chun?

-T.

likuid · 08-03-2001, 10:27 AM

my guess is that khayman is at the base of wing chun. he also probably owns stock in a production of a 'JKD/Wing Chun' video series...

aseepish - i think khayman and i have beaten this dead horse silly...i liked your question, maybe we should start a new thread? i'll try it.

darthmorton · 08-10-2001, 01:44 AM

AHHH!!!!

I have posted a thread on the aspects of Wing Chun, but here I wanted to address specifically the notion of the Wing Chun stance.

There are two things that differ: development and application.

When a good Wing Chun person fights, the stance is not about the external, rather it is about the knowledge of the fighters own center of gravity. Thus my Sifu can fight on the ground!? He keeps his "stance" while on the ground, because he has knowledge of where his center is.

The stance if for development, NOT FIGHTING!!!

Just as you use the focus mitts for development, you don't hit somone where you strike the focus mitts.

Some JKD people I have ran into have this idea that training situations MUST mirror actual fighting circumstances. I am not taking anything away from sparring practice. But I have yet to see sparring alone teach someone to fight.

A musician must sharpen their skills and develop if they are to play a composition. And likewise If you are going to learn how to improvise, then you must train that way.

To me JKD is a philosophy and a perspective (which I feel most people here understand).

Whatever someone thinks Wing Chun is not a part of JKD. However, JKD could be applied to Wing Chun.

Thank you.

dwoolman · 08-10-2001, 06:35 PM

Maybe when I asked the original question of this thread I should have just said what are the major differences between Jun Fan and Wing Chun? I only mentioned Jeet Kune Do because it is a major part of a serious Jun Fan practioner.

07-30-2001, 07:04 PM	#1 (permalink)
dwoolman Novice Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: UK Posts: 16	JKD differences to Wing Chun Because there are soo little schools of Jun Fan/JKD I really dont know any major differences between Jun Fan/JKD and Wing Chun? Since this is a JKD discussion forum does any of you know MAJOR differences between the two axcept the stances of course. I take TaeKwonDo but I really want to take JKD but since there are limited schools in the UK I might go for Wing Chun instead. So what are the differences between the two? __________________ JKD is just a name....thats all.

08-03-2001, 02:22 AM	#12 (permalink)
aseepish Registered User Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: British Columbia Posts: 1,629	Likuid: "Wing chun may have been at the base of bruce lee's jun fan, and ultimately bruce's JKD. . . " The question now is what is at the base of Wing Chun? -T. __________________ "It was about that time I realized that searching was my symbol, the emblem of those who go out at night with nothing in mind, the motives of a destroyer of compasses." -Cortázar

08-10-2001, 06:35 PM	#15 (permalink)
dwoolman Novice Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: UK Posts: 16	Maybe when I asked the original question of this thread I should have just said what are the major differences between Jun Fan and Wing Chun? I only mentioned Jeet Kune Do because it is a major part of a serious Jun Fan practioner. __________________ JKD is just a name....thats all.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

07-31-2001, 11:41 AM	#2 (permalink)
likuid Novice Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: new jersey Posts: 99	The operative term here is not 'how are they different', it is 'how are they related'...JKD is a philosophical approach to the martial ARTS which by its very virtue includes any martial art you may find 'useful'...whereas Wing Chun is a finite style, totally independent of Jun Fan. Jun Fan was Bruce Lee's original name, so he named 'his' art after himself. Through self exploration in Jun Fan he developed his ideas on Jeet Kune Do. So there are pieces of wing chun in Jun Fan, there is also grappling, boxing, evidence of fencing, and many other arts that Sijo Bruce extracted from. So i guess, in a nutshell, wing chun is just one ingredient in jun fan.

07-31-2001, 09:19 PM	#3 (permalink)
Khayman Novice Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Singapore Posts: 12	Differences? What differences? They are only found "in the beginning". JKD, as mentioned, is a very practical approach to the MA in general, but it uses Wing Chun principles... check out the "elbow in" principle and punching with vertical fists. Sure, it does includes boxing and stuffs, but Bruce Lee himself insisted on the vertical fist (based on his background in Wing Chun, which he found has several advantage over the classical horizontal fist). IMHO, its a relationship. JKD, I would say, is an extension of the system of Wing Chun, but to "learn" JKD without at least an exploration into Wing Chun is just basically "combined arts" approach, which loses its original intent of what JKD is about. By all means, learn Wing Chun, but keep an open mind. When we say that u liberate from the classical styles, u must have the classical styles to begin with. Learn it, use it, but do not be attached to it.

08-01-2001, 09:15 AM	#4 (permalink)
likuid Novice Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: new jersey Posts: 99	one might say that jun fan, as an art might be an 'extension' of Wing Chun...but, JKD definitely is not an extension of Wing Chun. JKD is a philsophic approach to the martial arts whereas wing chun is a style. You're comparing apples to oranges, philosophically speaking. Wing chun is a base for Jun Fan simply because Yip Man was Bruce Lee's first formal instructor. Bruce started his self exploration from there. To practice Jun Fan a base in wing chun is very helpful. However, the Toa of JKD does not say one must study Wing Chun, it simply iterates that adaptability is the key, and the individual, not the style is the most important element in martial arts.

08-01-2001, 11:36 AM	#5 (permalink)
Khayman Novice Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Singapore Posts: 12	have u learnt wing chun to begin with? heehee...... IMHO, u are only approaching the isue in scholarly fashion, i.e. overly technical with the terms. If u actually understand JKD, it is just a name. To quote the book u mentioned, read the very very last paragraph. Similarly, Wing Chun, or Jun Fan, is just a name, not a style etc. but the expression of an individual. The term JKD was coined to differentiate it from a "style", but coining it has become something of a paradox. In MA in general, one needs a "base style" to begin with, if not, what are the inessentials u are chipping away?

08-01-2001, 11:48 AM	#6 (permalink)
likuid Novice Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: new jersey Posts: 99	I don't think I'm being overly technical with the terms. I'm simply saying that i disagree when you say that JKD is an extension of Wing Chun. I do train all of the arts that fall within the 'typical' JKD curriculum. However, i am of the persuasion that one does not have to practice, wing chun, muaythai, kali, silat, etc, in order to practice Jeet Kune Do. I'm also a little confused when you reference the very last paragraph. you said: "Similarly, Wing Chun, or Jun Fan, is just a name, not a style etc. but the expression of an individual. The term JKD was coined to differentiate it from a "style", but coining it has become something of a paradox. In MA in general, one needs a "base style" to begin with, if not, what are the inessentials u are chipping away" I feel your own comments substantiate the notion that JKD is more than a 'style', so it certainly can't just be a mere extension of Wing Chun. Please don't get me wrong, i agree with most of the stuff you're saying, i'm just hung up on the 'extension of wing chun' thing.

08-02-2001, 12:36 PM	#7 (permalink)
Khayman Novice Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Singapore Posts: 12	Yup, correct, Being an extension, it alleviates itself to become more than just a style. To say that JKD is an extension of WC itself is a paradox. It is both true and false at the same time, depending on which angle u look at it. Bruce Lee himself did not complete WC when he arrived in the US in 1958. With what he has, and his own understanding of the martial arts, he is also aware of the limitations of what he has at that point of time. The WC he did, was therefore renamed to Jun Fan because of the improvisations he made to his "incomplete" system. In fact, the "right side forward" of his chi sau was implemented because he has a "weak" left side. Then later, because of the much publicised duel with Wong JM, he again realised that there is more to it then what he got and set out to do his personal research. JKD was coined to represent his approach and his philosophy. As much as the elimination of the classical mess is concern, most of the princples taught in Wing Chun is retained. In that sense, it is a natural extension of the Wing Chun system. Yet on the other hand, JKD also offers a fresh new perspective to the MA and combat. Its approach is similar, yet distinctive. In that sense, it is not.

08-02-2001, 01:19 PM	#8 (permalink)
likuid Novice Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: new jersey Posts: 99	we could go on about this forever...your logic obviously renders a different conclusion than mine. here's an analogy to say a fully grown oak tree is five feet tall is in itself a paradox. yes, at one point many years ago its maximum height was in fact five feet - however, it has become much more than that with time and maturity. additionally, wing chun may have been at the base of bruce lee's jun fan, and ultimately bruce's JKD...however, one does not need to study wing chun to practice JKD...he himself said it is just an idea, not a curriculum. JKD is more about perspective, rather than any prescribed art.

08-02-2001, 01:33 PM	#9 (permalink)
Khayman Novice Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Singapore Posts: 12	try teaching a kid to run before he can even stand.

08-02-2001, 02:15 PM	#10 (permalink)
likuid Novice Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: new jersey Posts: 99	you're being argumentative, ALL i am saying is that wing chun does not have to be the base for JKD

08-02-2001, 09:00 PM	#11 (permalink)
Khayman Novice Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Singapore Posts: 12	nope. I didnt even mention that WC have to be a base for JKD. I merely said JKD is an extension of WC.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

08-03-2001, 10:27 AM	#13 (permalink)
likuid Novice Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: new jersey Posts: 99	my guess is that khayman is at the base of wing chun. he also probably owns stock in a production of a 'JKD/Wing Chun' video series... aseepish - i think khayman and i have beaten this dead horse silly...i liked your question, maybe we should start a new thread? i'll try it.

08-10-2001, 01:44 AM	#14 (permalink)
darthmorton Novice Join Date: Oct 2000 Posts: 6	AHHH!!!! I have posted a thread on the aspects of Wing Chun, but here I wanted to address specifically the notion of the Wing Chun stance. There are two things that differ: development and application. When a good Wing Chun person fights, the stance is not about the external, rather it is about the knowledge of the fighters own center of gravity. Thus my Sifu can fight on the ground!? He keeps his "stance" while on the ground, because he has knowledge of where his center is. The stance if for development, NOT FIGHTING!!! Just as you use the focus mitts for development, you don't hit somone where you strike the focus mitts. Some JKD people I have ran into have this idea that training situations MUST mirror actual fighting circumstances. I am not taking anything away from sparring practice. But I have yet to see sparring alone teach someone to fight. A musician must sharpen their skills and develop if they are to play a composition. And likewise If you are going to learn how to improvise, then you must train that way. To me JKD is a philosophy and a perspective (which I feel most people here understand). Whatever someone thinks Wing Chun is not a part of JKD. However, JKD could be applied to Wing Chun. Thank you.