# What is Jeet Kune Do, article by Bruce Lee



## Xue Sheng (Jul 10, 2017)

Liberate Yourself From Classical Karate by Bruce Lee



> WHAT IS JEET KUNE DO? I am the first to admit that any attempt to crystalize Jeet Kune Do into a written article is no easy task. Perhaps to avoid making a thing out of a process, I have not until now personally written an article on JKD. Indeed, it is difficult to explain what Jeet Kune Do is, although it may be easier to explain what it is not.



Article from the Bruce Lee Foundation


----------



## Martial D (Jul 10, 2017)

Xue Sheng said:


> Liberate Yourself From Classical Karate by Bruce Lee
> 
> 
> 
> Article from the Bruce Lee Foundation



Everyone that posts in this board needs to read this. Then read it one more time.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 11, 2017)

Malos1979 said:


> Why?
> 
> Bruce Lee had it all written out, in theory. In practical sense it turns out to be different.



What exactly turns out to be different?


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 11, 2017)

Malos1979 said:


> I don't mean to be direspectfull, but Bruce Lee didn't do anything new, he pretended that he invented the wheel but there were so many people before him that had his way of thinking.



Yes, I am aware of that, you can find things from Sun Lutang and Wang Xiangzhai that are similar, But  your statement was "Bruce Lee had it all written out, in theory. _In practical sense it turns out to be different."
_
My question is, In what practical sense does it turn out to be different?
*
*


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 11, 2017)

Malos1979 said:


> I don't mean to be disrespectfull, but Bruce Lee didn't do anything new, he pretended that he invented the wheel but there were so many people before him that had his way of thinking.
> 
> To give you an exact example, is that the JKD he preached was about freedom of expression. The JKD that is taught nowadays (at least here in Holland), comes from Ted Wong. His students here train a rigid set of drills that have nothing to do with that freedom.



There are different schools of thought and practice for JKD and you are correct, it has become a "style" which if you read Bruce Lee, what he said and what is being done by some, are not the same. But you have to start somewhere and I am of the belief that what Bruce Lee taught is what should be learned and then what you do with it from there is up to you. There is the Dan Inosanto side of things where it evolves as it goes along and what he ultimately ends up teaching you as JKD, is outside of what Bruce Lee originally taught, although he does start you there. There is Concepts vs Philosophy and to be honest I am not sure who is on what side of that fence, and I am not sure it even matters. I do know Ted Wong and Dan Inosanto are on opposite sides of that fence.

I trained JKD only briefly and it was on the Ted Wong, Jerry Poteet side of the fence and it taught me a awful lot about the martial arts I trained, especially Xingyiquan. However I did wrestle with this quote from Bruce Lee for a bit



> Jeet Kune Do is just a name used, a boat to get one across, and once across it is to be discarded and not to be carried on one's back. — Bruce Lee



At first it made me think that Bruce Lee himself would be displeased at all the JKD schools around, but then I thought about it, someone has to help you build the boat to get across, and I am very happy there are those out there, legitimately trained in JKD to hep with that. After that, what you do with it is what makes the difference.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 11, 2017)

Malos1979 said:


> Why?
> 
> Bruce Lee had it all written out, in theory. In practical sense it turns out to be different.



_"It is conceivable that a long time ago a certain martial artist discovered some partial truth. During his lifetime, the man resisted the temptation to organize this partial truth, although this is a common tendency in man’s search for security and certainty in life. After his death his students took “his” hypothesis, “his” postulates, “his” inclination, and “his” method and turned them into law. Impressive creeds were then invented, solemn reinforcing ceremonies prescribed, rigid philosophy and patterns formulated, and so on, until finally an institution was erected. So, what originated as one man’s institution of some sort of personal fluidity has been transformed into solidified, fixed knowledge, complete with organized classified responses presented in a logical order. In so doing, the well-meaning, loyal followers have not only made this knowledge a holy shrine, but also a tomb in which they have buried the founder’s wisdom."
_
*yes he had it all written out , exactly what would happen to his teachings after he died.*


----------



## Martial D (Jul 11, 2017)

Malos1979 said:


> Why?
> 
> Bruce Lee had it all written out, in theory. In practical sense it turns out to be different.


I don't mean the jkd bits in specific, more the bits about how alive fighting styles tend to be crystalized until their usefulness becomes either marginalized or negligible. Indeed, the irony is that this situation became the reality too for JKD following Lee's death.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 11, 2017)

Malos1979 said:


> The fact remains, Bruce Lee was an overhyped actor that did some martial arts (the Wing Chun community claims he didn't get far), then used that celeb status to write a book about his own thoughts on martial arts.
> 
> I know alot of Americans idolize him and think he's an icon, in Europe however we have far greater icons if you compare Bruce Lee with people like Jon Bluming, Tom Harinck and Peter Smit.



I don't think that is a fact actually. He was an actor, he was rather skilled, he trained Wing Chun and there is not a consensus as to how far he got, the only thing that is certain is he did not complete the entire curriculum and there are various reasons stated for that, there is also some indication that he planned on going back to finish, but he died before that happened.

He also studied a lot of other arts to come up with JKD and had an eye for figuring thing out (I have personally known MAist that were good at that so he is not alone there). And in the 60s, even the late 60s, Asian actors were not that big a deal in the west, they were pretty much second class citizens in hollywood. We are looking at him in the rear view mirror and making judgements, but he was not the big name then like he is now. But with that said, one of his goals, with his movies, was to highlight JKD. He had to Hong Kong to have a successful movie career and there he was a Big Deal, but not so much in the West until after his death.

He was a rather talented martial artist and there are many talented martial artists from that time who say exactly that (Chuck Norris, Joe Lewis, etc.). Are there others equally as talented or even more talented? Yes there are. But I think there is a tendency these days to either deify Bruce Lee or Vilify him and to be honest I don't think either is the way to go and I think much of it is for self promotion and gets right back to what he was talking about... and that is pretty much what Bruce Lee was saying when he wrote, in his article



> But the distortion does not necessarily end here. In reaction to “the other’s truth”, another martial artist or possibly a dissatisfied disciple, organizes an opposite approach – such as the “soft” style versus the “hard” style, the “internal” school versus the “external” school, and all these separative nonsenses. Soon this opposite faction also becomes a large organization, with it’s own laws and patterns. A rivalry begins, with each style claiming to possess the “truth” to the exclusion of all others.



That I talked about in my blog

Read, try not to judge, learn, try not to judge and then once you have done that take what you think is useful and discard the rest.... that is pretty much what Bruce Lee's JKD philosophy seems to be about.

As to what others made of him after his death... he has no control over


----------



## DanT (Jul 11, 2017)

You have to be free, yet the way Bruce taught was almost the opposite...

-the on guard position
-the techniques 
-chi Sao

Whether you like it or not, Bruce taught a system, and all that be free mumbo jumbo doesn't work when you are trying to pass something down.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 11, 2017)

DanT said:


> You have to be free, yet the way Bruce taught was almost the opposite...
> 
> -the on guard position
> -the techniques
> ...



Yes he did, but I think he was trying to avoid that, although I would not call it mumbo jumbo, I do not see how that is possible if you want to get your point/style of fighting across.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 11, 2017)

Malos1979 said:


> The fact remains, Bruce Lee was an overhyped actor that did some martial arts (the Wing Chun community claims he didn't get far), then used that celeb status to write a book about his own thoughts on martial arts.
> 
> I know alot of Americans idolize him and think he's an icon, in Europe however we have far greater icons if you compare Bruce Lee with people like Jon Bluming, Tom Harinck and Peter Smit.



so apparently your not a Bruce Lee fan, thats ok.  but your statement is a bit off.  being an "icon" as you say, has more to do with influence and social recognition and less to do with martial art rank and accomplishments.
i have never heard of the three guys you mention... but you have heard of Bruce Lee,,,. so who is more famous?  Bruce Lee has permeated the culture like no other martial artist in history.  your statement that Europe has greater icons is not really true. sure Jon Bluming (had to google him) is a legit 10th dan, ok so what,,,i know and train with 5 different legit Okinawan ranked 10th dans here in America. frankly, its not that special. its something i will never achieve but the point is being a 10th dan and having some remarkable accomplishments in your past does not make you an icon. now if you want to say Jon was a better martial artist , well thats a different argument and could very well be true.
John Wayne was an icon but to be honest his acting wasnt that good.  Mcdonalds is an icon but there burgers kinda suck.  i think your confusing icon with something else.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 11, 2017)

hoshin1600 said:


> John Wayne was an icon but to be honest his acting wasnt that good.



 his acting wasnt that good!!!!!


----------



## Buka (Jul 11, 2017)

Oh goody, more "Bruce Lee sucked" stuff.

Cut the guy some slack, he was just a kid when he died. Had a hell of a positive impact on the arts in general, especially here in America.

I'm thankful he did. Would have loved to have met the man.


----------



## DanT (Jul 11, 2017)

Xue Sheng said:


> Yes he did, but I think he was trying to avoid that, although I would not call it mumbo jumbo, I do not see how that is possible if you want to get your point/style of fighting across.


I agree, what he said was mainly air, a punch is a punch, a good combo is a good combo. There is no "my combo" and "your combo". If I teach you "my combo" is it passing on tradition? Of course not. It's passing on a combo that works.


----------



## drop bear (Jul 12, 2017)

Tried to lead a collaborative effort. Which you kind of can't. You just have to be part of one.


----------



## drop bear (Jul 12, 2017)

Malos1979 said:


> In regards to who are you posting this?



Technically everyone. My comment on the topic.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 12, 2017)

Malos1979 said:


> The fact that you didn't heard of them proves my point actually,


 No it doesn't prove your point at all. It's a fragmented argument your using.  Just to be clear, I think the art Bruce had in mind is not what it turned out to be, so in a sense we agree. My only contention is your choice argue points.  The strict definition of an icon is a religious painting or a computer avatar of sorts. But in English it has a connotation of being famous to the point of being imbeded into the psychological social framework of a culture. Like the computer icon the little image represents a much larger body.  This is exactly what Bruce Lee is. His name alone and even more so his image, is seen as a representation of martial arts as a whole. If we were to remove language and had an abstract  phone app that was martial arts, the icon button on your phone could be Bruce Lee and everyone would understand what it was for. The only image that represents martial arts more and is more universal would be the white gi.
To say there are better martial artists out in the world is  complete separate thought.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 12, 2017)

Well it appears 8 day short of the 44th anniversary of the death of Bruce Lee that he is still relevant and causing all sorts of arguments based on his training methodology...And you know, I don't think he would be all that upset about it, likely he would be rather pleased, of course that is an assumption on my part...

all I have left to say in this thread is what was already said by Buka

Quote for Truth

*


Buka said:



			Oh goody, more "Bruce Lee sucked" stuff.

Cut the guy some slack, he was just a kid when he died. Had a hell of a positive impact on the arts in general, especially here in America.

I'm thankful he did. Would have loved to have met the man.
		
Click to expand...

*


----------



## Buka (Jul 12, 2017)

Just a thought here. So, if we're coming up on 44 years since Bruce Lee passed away, how many commenting here are old enough to have been an adult when Bruce Lee was alive and doing, or not doing, all these things I hear about?

Or are some of your opinions based on other resources?


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 12, 2017)

Buka said:


> Just a thought here. So, if we're coming up on 44 years since Bruce Lee passed away, how many commenting here are old enough to have been an adult when Bruce Lee was alive and doing, or not doing, all these things I hear about?
> 
> Or are some of your opinions based on other resources?



All I can say is I was a kid who just started Jujutsu in 1972 and a year later he died. I remember Bruce Lee from Magazines, the Green Hornet (Watched it religiously right along with Batman), the announcement of his death and announcement of the new movie Enter the Dragon. The other resources were his books and the comments of those that knew him in the MA world of the time. Which I was old enough to know then...is very different from now


----------



## Steve (Jul 12, 2017)

I used to walk by his grave fairly often, before Brandon was buried next to him.  Otherwise I don't think much about him, unless someone stirs the pot a little.


----------



## Jenna (Jul 13, 2017)

Steve said:


> I used to walk by his grave fairly often, before Brandon was buried next to him.  Otherwise I don't think much about him, unless someone stirs the pot a little.


Where is that?


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 13, 2017)

Buka said:


> So, if we're coming up on 44 years since Bruce Lee passed away, how many commenting here are old enough to have been an adult



I was an adult, serving in the RAF. I remember we were all quite sad when he passed away. what he said and did didn't change my training or how I thought about martial arts to be honest then or now but what he did do was make them 'cool' to people who'd previously thought it 'weird' or 'macho' to do martial arts. We all enjoyed his films whether we were martial artists or not. I have always thought of him as a practitioner of Chinese martial arts so to be honest have never taken a lot of notice of his writing on martial arts, might have been a mistake but I wouldn't slag him off either. I really don't know that much about his style or training. I do think he was good for martial arts though, he may have been self promoting but that's not always a bad thing if it changes people's perception. As I said he made us martial artists of whatever style cool so a lot to be thankful for there.


----------



## Steve (Jul 13, 2017)

Jenna said:


> Where is that?


He's buried in a cemetery next to Volunteer Park in Seattle.  It's on Capitol Hill, with a beautiful view of Lake Washington.  Brandon Lee is also buried there now, but he passed much later.


----------



## jobo (Jul 13, 2017)

for once I find myself in agreement with every one, im not sure on the,scale of things how,good BL was, but talented enough that he,wasn't a complete movie fake,but was a,great self publicist
I have trouble with the jkd being style with out a,style, it has become just that and then it begs the question if jkd is the best bits or the other styles and therefore,superior why its such a minority style, the other's should really have been replaced by it. So maybe it's not really that good?.

it seems He is at least as famous now as he was before his untimely,death. a bit like Marilyn Monroe, so definitely an iconic figure and surprisingly the body type most men would like to have, I say,surprisingly as it a lot,easier to replicate that toned thin look that the Huge musclemen look.( provided your thin in the first place)


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 13, 2017)

Jenna said:


> Where is that?



Where is what?


----------



## wingchun100 (Jul 14, 2017)

Malos1979 said:


> The fact remains, Bruce Lee was an overhyped actor that did some martial arts (the Wing Chun community claims he didn't get far), then used that celeb status to write a book about his own thoughts on martial arts.
> 
> I know alot of Americans idolize him and think he's an icon, in Europe however we have far greater icons if you compare Bruce Lee with people like Jon Bluming, Tom Harinck and Peter Smit.



Actually, he didn't use his celebrity status to write a book because, aside from the slim CHINESE GUNG FU book, every book was published posthumously.


----------



## wingchun100 (Jul 14, 2017)

jobo said:


> for once I find myself in agreement with every one, im not sure on the,scale of things how,good BL was, but talented enough that he,wasn't a complete movie fake,but was a,great self publicist
> I have trouble with the jkd being style with out a,style, it has become just that and then it begs the question if jkd is the best bits or the other styles and therefore,superior why its such a minority style, the other's should really have been replaced by it. So maybe it's not really that good?.
> 
> it seems He is at least as famous now as he was before his untimely,death. a bit like Marilyn Monroe, so definitely an iconic figure and surprisingly the body type most men would like to have, I say,surprisingly as it a lot,easier to replicate that toned thin look that the Huge musclemen look.( provided your thin in the first place)



I think JKD has not replaced every other style simply because not everyone agrees that combining bits and pieces of styles is the best way to do it. Some still believe in sticking to one system.


----------



## jobo (Jul 14, 2017)

wingchun100 said:


> I think JKD has not replaced every other style simply because not everyone agrees that combining bits and pieces of styles is the best way to do it. Some still believe in sticking to one system.


yes but some people won't accept anything new if is superior or not. But the take up and,spread of jkd, is far less than that other bits of other system all mixed into one MMA. So clearly a lot of people will buy into a new system if it's good enough


----------



## WhisperingButterfly (Jul 19, 2017)




----------



## KPM (Aug 4, 2017)

My 2 cents....probably worth less than that!......Bruce was into philosophy.  He studied Buddhism as well as Krishnamurti.   JKD was his path of discovery and development.  JKD was a process.  You see his martial art style evolve through the years.  There were the early years, the Oakland years, the Chinatown years, the final years when living in HK....and his personal style and teaching was different at each phase.  There seems to me no "one" JKD.  There seems to be no good definition of JKD.  It is different things to different people exactly because it is really a path or process rather than a style.

Now, when you get past the philosophical points and down to practicality.....any martial art has to be taught using a curriculum of some sort.  When you solidify things down to a specific curriculum, now you are defining the style.  That obviously differed at each phase of Bruce's own development and differs today depending upon the JKD teacher.   So remove the philosophical layer and what you find in JKD is a search for practicality.  And what works on a practical level can vary depending upon a person's physical abilities and make up.  It can also vary depending upon the fighting environment or context.

So on one level you have the people that want to do exactly what Bruce Lee was doing (which also varies depending on which phase of his life they are concentrating on) and on another level you have people that want to follow the concepts Bruce laid out and train more eclectically to come up with what works for them.  "Original" vs. "concepts"....."style" vs. "path".... both approaches are valid depending upon your purpose.


----------



## FighterTwister (Sep 2, 2017)

Hi m8 I'm new here myself.

I would like to say that there are many great fighter's some never raise to the surface because they don't pursue media movies etc.

Guys like John Bluming are an example of that of course.






Bruce Lee never said he would beat all in a fight, but only to claim how confident he is as a martial artist, he is no fool but very intelligent.

So much has been blown out of proportion nothing seems to stick anymore.

Bruce Lee was a master simple as that he was a student like all others in the martial arts world.

I have been a student of all but with a passion for JKD thats rooted in Wing Chun myself that I love for it's artistic sense and practicality.

Watch this.............






Its good fun using a Mook Jong I encourage people to try it out.


----------



## MA_Student (Sep 2, 2017)

There's no middle ground with lee it seems, he was either an actor who couldn't fight or a god among men who could beat the whole ufc roster at once.

I don't believe lee was as people claim I don't believe he was the fastest man alive or that he couldn't be touched but he was obviously skilled.

Maybe in pure wing chun he was nothing speacial and there are probably way better people than him in the wing chun world but that's not what he's known for. He was obviously very fit and very strong and he was respected by the top martial artists at the time including ed Parker, chuck Norris, joe lewis, mike stone, dan innosanto and others so if he was just a average martial artist they wouldn't care about him. 

Again I do believe he's overrated these days and people confuse his movies with real life but to say he wasn't a good martial artist is frankly stupid


----------

