JKD Phillosophy and art

[The_Judo_Jibboo]

Well, I'll be the one to disagree. Jeet Kune Do is, and was always intended to be a concept rather than a style. Jeet kune do was Bruce Lee's personal expression of himself through combat, it was not the style that he fought with.
Of course you will all know that Jeet kune do translates into 'way of the intercepting fist or foot' and this concept was taken from the fencing concept of the stop-hit whereby you intercept an opponent's attack with an attack of your own. This was just one concept that Jeet kune do was named after and developed with and reportedly Bruce regretted having given it this name or any other as he feared that it having a name would imply a set structure and routine and it clearly has because people now argue about other people not practicing Jeet kune do because they do not know 'the Jeet kune do foundation techniques'. I say that there should be no such thing.
Now while I agree that without a guide on the journey to finding your own personal truth/way, you will have a very difficult time developing your skill set to sufficiently high a level, I disagree that your not studying Jeet kune do if you have only ever read the decent literature etc. If you really study the material and think about its meaning and make it true for you then you are at least practicing your own interpretation of Jeet kune do, which is what it was always intended to be.
The problem you have to be aware of in this case is that without an experienced Jeet kune do practitioner you are at a greater risk of misinterpreting the information/message and that, in my opinion, is where you will really cease to be practicing the Jeet kune do that Bruce Lee developed.

Bravo for that first post! this is what i was trying to say, you did it better

[Killing Sword]

Well, I'll be the one to disagree. Jeet Kune Do is, and was always intended to be a concept rather than a style. Jeet kune do was Bruce Lee's personal expression of himself through combat, it was not the style that he fought with.
Of course you will all know that Jeet kune do translates into 'way of the intercepting fist or foot' and this concept was taken from the fencing concept of the stop-hit whereby you intercept an opponent's attack with an attack of your own. This was just one concept that Jeet kune do was named after and developed with and reportedly Bruce regretted having given it this name or any other as he feared that it having a name would imply a set structure and routine and it clearly has because people now argue about other people not practicing Jeet kune do because they do not know 'the Jeet kune do foundation techniques'. I say that there should be no such thing.
Now while I agree that without a guide on the journey to finding your own personal truth/way, you will have a very difficult time developing your skill set to sufficiently high a level, I disagree that your not studying Jeet kune do if you have only ever read the decent literature etc. If you really study the material and think about its meaning and make it true for you then you are at least practicing your own interpretation of Jeet kune do, which is what it was always intended to be.
The problem you have to be aware of in this case is that without an experienced Jeet kune do practitioner you are at a greater risk of misinterpreting the information/message and that, in my opinion, is where you will really cease to be practicing the Jeet kune do that Bruce Lee developed.

[kanik]

Hey thanks all you have helped a great deal, i uderstand what your all saying finally, and i think your understanding what i am saying to, so thanks again.

[tel]

i agree with fenwick too. have study under poteet and inosanto lines and would say there is no differance in the jfjkd.

[Tim McFatridge]

fenwick....all I can say is I agree...

good post guys......all of you.

[fenwick99]

re:

I don't know if there is really a difference between philosophy and art here.
Bruce tried to physically express Taoism, Zen, Krishnamurti, etc. through a fighting system of absolute effiency with no wasted movement or energy.
Every block (tan, bong, angle deflection) is an attack, as it disrupts the opponent's balance. Every attack is for defense as well as offense, because it prevents the opponent from getting set and timing an attack. This is based on taoism, tai chi, and wing chun, but is also present inm various writings such as Musashi, Hagakure, sun Tzu, etc.
I also question the division between concepts and jfjkd. Guro Inosanto teach Bruce's art AS BRUCE TAUGHT IT in his jeet kuen class, True, he is interested in many other things. Both Bruce and Ed Parker encouraged Mr. Inosanto to
study FMA. You can do what bruce did and other things.
The discussion of what is and is not jkd is academic

[Little Apple]

Kanik, of course you'll improve, it's a great phillosophy. There's absolutly nothing stopping you from liking BL's phillosophies and applying them to other arts, your banking, or tieing your shoes. But your first question was:

"Hey im wondering would somone be considered following jeet kune do if they followed the principles but never trained in the art?"

No one ever said it was useless to only use the phillosophies, or even discouraged you from lerning and applying them. All they said was that it wasn't JKD all by itself. Nothing wrong with that.

Omlets are cool, but sometimes you just want scrambled eggs. Eggs by themselves aren't really and omlet, but that doesn't mean they're bad. Same type of thing.

[Troll Virus]

Yeah maybe im just confused here... but that doesnt stop me wondering my new question... why does the phillosophy and the art of JKD have to be combined? isnt it that if we go by what bruce teaches than we wil improve, not necasserily having to go by his "art"?

There are people far more eloquent and economic of expression than me here, but if it helps;

There are a few different groups orbiting JKD!

The Jun Fan JKD people seek to emulate everything Bruce had and use that as a foundation to evolve from.

The JKD 'concepts' groups are more along the lines of using 'no way as way', which makes them either more free or more limited depending on the individuals.

Philosophy and art always have to be combined.
One cannot exist without the other.

While Bruce was arguably 30 years ahead of his time, there are plenty other people taking on his work and making better information more readily available.

Out of Dan Inosanto's circle, you have people like Marc Denny of DBMA, who expresses very deep philosophy and high levels of art.

[kanik]

Yeah maybe im just confused here... but that doesnt stop me wondering my new question... why does the phillosophy and the art of JKD have to be combined? isnt it that if we go by what bruce teaches than we wil improve, not necasserily having to go by his "art"?

[Troll Virus]

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

[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.

[kanik]

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.

[CorySmith]

Consider the source...

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. ;-)

[The_Judo_Jibboo]

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.

[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.