JKD Community

[Marku]

A question for everyone who has done/did JKD. Have you ever met someone who had the same enthusiasm(or whatever) as Bruce lee for JKD in the way he intended it. Are your fellow JKD practicitioners more interested in keeping with the traditional teachings of bruce lee or do they expand beyond that? what made you think the way you do about JKD?

[Tireces]

JKD isnt about expanding. Expand too much, and youre spread too thin. Its absorb what is useful, and discard what is useless. But add only what is essentially your own. Not add everything you can get your hands on! And its using no way as way...not 1,974,239 ways as way! That means your 1,974,239 times farther off the mark than a guy stuck in only one way!

[LS]

JKD has a lot of zen in it.. i'll say this much.

[YODA]

Hey Tireces...

Using no "way" as way

or

Using "no way" as way

Which one do YOU subscribe to?

[LS]

because of my current understanding of Zen i'd subscribe to "no way"

[Tireces]

"No way". A punch is just a punch, and a kick just a kick. I prefer to observe the physics and action of any combative motion, rather than simply learning to classify by style. The only purpose of identifying techniques by what "style" they were adapted from, into JKD, should be to show how it was changed to fit in. Water is formless, not multi-formed. It assumes shapes, but only that which fits its container. It does not limit itself to only a certain container (or containerS). This is the ideal, however, it cannot be the reality. The perfect martial artist is like water, but there is no perfect martial artist, there are those who simply strive to come as close as possible. Why does being formless even have to refer to "style"? That is an extremely limited view people take of it. It could just mean something like adapting a strike to the situation. You can take one "type" of punch, and make so many different "types" of punches out of it by throwing it from varying positions and at varying targets. The problem is, by limiting themselves to the belief that Jeet Kune Do just means you shouldnt be governed by only ONE style, people lose its meaning that the ideal is to completely transcend style. In this, they're already limiting themselves, viewing things only in terms of styles. Things should be viewed in terms of what they are, and "styles" should be viewed in terms of how they work. Not simple critiques in terms of "this art has the most (powerful, fast, elusive, etc.)...whatever" why is this called such? Is it really a true remark? What is behind it that makes it such if it is? This is why merely cross training does not make you a student of jeet kune do, as many seem to think it does.

[LS]

have you met sifu kent yet ? I've heard nothing but good things about him and i've always enjoyed reading his books. Figured that since orfanos is under Kent in his association i figured Kent would have stopped by. that's all. And I agreee completely with your assessment btw.

[Tireces]

Yes, he comes by, Sifu Dino has some weekend seminars yearly, Chris Kent is one of them. I dont know if it'll continue though, a lot of people say they will come but dont, and give some really goofy excuse. I remember one guy who actually said that he "suddenly had to go on a ski trip". Like it was an emergency or something. But I've been there three times when he was, he was actually running a seminar there the day I went to sign up for the school.

[AndyD]

Originally posted by Tireces
"No way". A punch is just a punch, and a kick just a kick. I prefer to observe the physics and action of any combative motion, rather than simply learning to classify by style. The only purpose of identifying techniques by what "style" they were adapted from, into JKD, should be to show how it was changed to fit in. Water is formless, not multi-formed. It assumes shapes, but only that which fits its container. It does not limit itself to only a certain container (or containerS). This is the ideal, however, it cannot be the reality. The perfect martial artist is like water, but there is no perfect martial artist, there are those who simply strive to come as close as possible. Why does being formless even have to refer to "style"? That is an extremely limited view people take of it. It could just mean something like adapting a strike to the situation. You can take one "type" of punch, and make so many different "types" of punches out of it by throwing it from varying positions and at varying targets. The problem is, by limiting themselves to the belief that Jeet Kune Do just means you shouldnt be governed by only ONE style, people lose its meaning that the ideal is to completely transcend style. In this, they're already limiting themselves, viewing things only in terms of styles. Things should be viewed in terms of what they are, and "styles" should be viewed in terms of how they work. Not simple critiques in terms of "this art has the most (powerful, fast, elusive, etc.)...whatever" why is this called such? Is it really a true remark? What is behind it that makes it such if it is? This is why merely cross training does not make you a student of jeet kune do, as many seem to think it does.

Well said Tireces!