I've come to one conclusion...

[rogue]

... after trying to get straight answers out of the two JF/JKD sifu on the main forum; Sijo :rolleyes: Bruce Lee was trying to recreate Wing Chun but on his own terms. Funny how when some of you guys talk about WC concepts it makes sense but I can't for the life of me figure out what any of the JF/JKD guys are talking about. And I used to do JKD, at least I thought I did. :confused:

[rubthebuddha]

think of it this way:

what does jeet kune do translate as?

the way of the intercepting fist.

where do you think that idea came from?

[rogue]

Uhhh, ummmm, hmmmm, just give me another minute and I think I'll get it.:confused: :D

[Rolling_Hand]

If you head itches you've got it.

However, the first move is yours. Just don't rub too hard.

[Ford Prefect]

What are you trying to find out about JKD?

[KenWingJitsu]

"the way of the intercepting fist.

where do you think that idea came from?"

he heh! Exactly!!!!!!!!

[rogue]

Honestly Ford, after going back and forth with Lamar and Ron I am totally clueless as to what JKD is. So I no longer even know what the heck I was trying to find out! :confused:

Funny but when I studied JKD I thought I at least had an idea of what we were doing, now I don't even know if I studied JKD, concepts or otherwise.:D

All I know is that Inosanto isn't good for JKD (according to Ron), Bruce earned the title master with 5 years WC, and that Lee before his death completed JKD and finished adding to it.

[TjD]

i believe JKD is about learning how win in a fight

however i could be wrong.... who knows what those crazy JKD guys are up to

however i doubt it can be worse than whatever those kooky canadians are up and aboot to, eh?


peace
travis :)


ps. sorry to all the canadians out there:) us americans love ya! really!

[tiger_1]

my friend rogue you have now good topic and fine theme , and im see you have many years of traning martial arts . but im like to say :like first wing chun is kung fu its means have philosophy and road for future creation inside frontiers of that texnic j.k.d. is not that is just fine and progresiv texnic of street fight so here have one strong line of departh of difrent road. about onthers kung fu styles there is have own texnic and own strategy but style of power like c.l.f. and onthers have power from cirkle but wing chun is direct opponent tho departh cirkle and have power from animal instict cose is style of three animal texnic in strategy of close fight and central line ,some work positions and go in road of speed tho in last create metamorfose some go in forms tho in last go to road od energy. im see you work many texnic but im like to say for wingchungers if: you work wing chun like suport you can work aikido or kempo that is good suport texnic . ok cool just friendly tiger_1:)

[Ford Prefect]

Hey Rogue,

I think that JKD is a completely personal thing, and that is why there are so many takes on what "real" JKD is. It is just a concept of functionalizing your current system and filling in the gaps where it is needed. I don't think it was ever meant to become a specific style with certian techniques. In fact, that's what Bruce Lee was trying to get away from. In truth, any specific answer as to what JKD is or was supposed to be was lost when Bruce died, so anybody that says they "know" what it is is full of sh!t. There's as many definitions on what JKD is as there are people who've read about it and Bruce Lee. I guess what I'm saying is that you should just find your own answer. Find the answer that means something to you, and that is your "right" answer.

I know I've read that you now study TKD. Just functionalize it by throwing on the gear and going full-out with different people/styles. If you find you are missing something, then find something else to fill the gap. Everybody is different, and only you can find your truth in combat. When you do that, it can be said you are practicing JKD. In the words of Bruce, JKD is just honest self-expression. ;)

That's my $.02 anyway.

[rubthebuddha]

if jkd is supposed to be about expression, isn't anyone who treats their art as an extension of themselves and a way to let out what's inside, in theory, a jkd practitioner? if set techniques and forms are not jkd-ish, nor rigid style limitations, isn't anyone who just lets their body move as it knows best practicing jkd?

what i'm driving at is this: you're practicing chi sau and your whole body is just on. your mind is nowhere, and your whole body is just moving as it knows deep down in its muscles. or your sparring against a fellow tkd student, and your hands and feet just move on their own with no command thinking, "hey, i see an opening -- i should kick!" or your practicing wushu with no set pattern -- you are simply letting your body flow and move as if it were one with the air surrounding it -- is that not what individual jkd is about, or do we need inosanto or vunak or anyone else to bring form and structure to something that just flows ...

[Ford Prefect]

Naw. You're missing what I was getting at. You can flow and enter into the state of no-mind (that's what the samurai's called it) and still remain in the confines of a style. Self expression is about not being bound by a single way to do things. You may be flowing, but are you being as efficient as possible? You could be using a styles footwork when maybe boxing's or kali's would work better in that situation. Every style of martial arts has a way that they fight. That's like giving a painter two different color paints or confining him to a specific genre of art. Sure he can express himself with those paints in that genre, but wouldn't he be able to express himself even better if he was allowed to add another color here or there? Why be limitted when there are unlimitted ways to express yourself.

Personally, I don't even think there should be "JKD" schools out there. Bruce himself wrote that he hated giving his way a name because then people would attempt to set a definition for it which would lead to doctrine etc etc. JKD is more of a philosophy that can not only be applied to martial arts, but also to most other things in life. Think outside the box. Explore different ways of doing things that you are not used to. You will learn alot about yourself and other people.

I hope this doesn't sound esoteric. I'm far from a philosophy major, and I'm even further from a Bruce Lee or Shaolin monk wannabe. I just see the good things that can happen when you are contantly expanding and growing.

[rubthebuddha]

you don't want to be a philosophy major. i shudder to think back to my college student days.

honestly, after taking 5 upper division philosophy courses in two quarters, i came to the conclusion that it's good that philosophy students have a difficult time getting jobs, as i didn't want any of the people i had classes with in the general workforce. i loved the curriculum and most the profs were cool, but only around 5 percent of the students had anything resembling the ability to maintain a constant thought or stick to the topic at hand. it was infuriating to listen to the *******es try to worm their way around reality so much that when they were done thinking, they had no clue where they were, where they started from or where they wanted to wind up.

it was so bad that i even started keeping tallies as to how often i'd think a certain thought during class:

STFU - shut the fûck up
S,PKM - someone, please kill me
S,PKH - someone, please kill him/her
JFC - jesus fûcking christ
GG,TPAJ - good god, that person's a *******

the list goes on. again, i loved the curriculum, and the profs were coo, but the majority of the students' heads were so far up that they could tell me what color their prostate or uterus was.

yeah, so it's pedantic and petty, but three hours every day of bachelor's-level philosphy is not my idea of tea and biscuits.

[anerlich]

rubthebuddha is correct, the path of Western Philosophy is a tough one.

My dad is a retired professor of philosophy (Uni of Adelaide). There's nothing wrong with him (OK, I'm biased), but some of his friends (who number among "the world's leading living philosophers") are major crackpots and eccentrics. One example is a guy who wears nicotine patches religiously, not to give up smoking (he doesn't) but because he claims the nico makes him think better. Yeah .... right. Two of my dad's friends attempted a suicide pact when the wife had terminal cancer, but the husband failed the attempt. The divorce and tempestuous relationship rate is way out of whack considering the discipline is something supposed to make you deal more rationally with life.

Everytime I see someone on a KF or MA board post something like "we should all stop arguing and involve ourselves more deeply in philosophy", I just laugh.

The major problem with male phil. students is the erroneous idea that sounding deep, sensitive and esoteric is class is going to somehow make the female students in their tutorials hot for them. I did phil. for a year out of some perception of family obligation and saw this attempted countless times with a success rate of zero. I never tried myself as I was lusting after women in PE and science (not that my success rate was anything to brag about, but that's OT).

[Ford Prefect]

LOL! Before I actually regretted taking only the minimum requirements for philosophy in college... ;)

[rubthebuddha]

yeah, i earned my minor and got the heck out. the studies were fun when i was either reading or listening to the prof, but when the students opened their traps, it was all over.

i work for the university now, and at times i think it might be fun to go back and complete the major (it'd be about a year of part-time studies), but then i remember the agony and the bloodthirstiness i'd feel every time i went into the humanities building, and i decide that i'll just stick with my planned grad degree.

[Sharky]

Please do NOT tell me my post yesterday was deleted?!?! *I* was the one being nice despite all these people cussing a style they know nothing about!?? This forum is ****ing ridiculous.