Please explain ?

Question

Bruce Lee said "The highest technique is to have no technique, A good martial artist has no technique; he makes his opponent's technique his technique" meaning that you strike after the opoonent's attack. But what if your opponent won't attack first ?

Answer 1

In a fight, not sparring, if your opponent does not attack you, why do you want to attack him? That is called "picking a fight".

The martial arts does not teach to pick fights.

In "in dojo" sparring, someone has to start it.

I am one of those who prefers counterattack to attack. I have much better luck if I am not the one to initiate attack. No matter how good you are, when you attack, you leave openings.

I learned to jerk my head or my shoulders in these sparring matches to get them to attack first. With those who knew me well that did not work and I just started it myself.

Answer 2

In a REAL LIFE fight, there is no such thing as "cheating." You can "cheat" in a competition if you break a "rule." Anything that keeps you alive in the real world is true martial arts, not cheating. Anyone who wants to hurt or kill you is not playing by any rules, neither should you.

What Lee may mean by this is that specific techniques do not make a good martial artist. A true master learns the underlying lesson of the technique, and then applies this to all similar situations. In the same way that you can be "defensive" or "aggressive" in dealing with life problems, many martial arts techniques have multiple layers of meanings in the sense that they embody an approach to the aggression of other people or forces. I think Lee is telling us not to get hung up on what a technique looks like or seems like, but to pursue the ability to succeed in every situation.

As for "he makes his opponent's technique his technique," my thought would be that this has to do with simply reacting to the opponent's actions. Just because the opponent does not attack you physically first does not mean that they are not active in some way. They may be holding back to psych you out, they may be actually afraid of engaging the fight or making the first move. This hesitancy is still and action to which you can react on the higher level.

What you take from Lee's quote, as is the case for all quotes, is simply what you can read into it based on your own experience. I see "Use tactics and not just techniques; see the true context of the battle," as a possible message here.

Answer 3

Hi There

Firstly there are lots of good answers to this post. My take on what he was trying to say was that we all go full circle and eventually you stop worrying about style and just do it without conscious thought. The other side of this is that if you try to make the bits fit together your attacker senses what you are trying to do and works around it. You have to just do and react to what you're given. If you're attacker wont attack then walk away and no one gets hurt. Remember that you don't win by knocking someone out or killing them. You win by using very little effort to achieve the best results.

Regards

Idai

Answer 4

If your opponent won't attack first, there is no fight. If he won't attack, and you won't attack, you should be TALKING and not fighting. Therefore, his "attack" is to not attack, your technique is to respond to that "attack" with a technique of your own that is dependant on what he did- in other words, not to attack yourself.
What Bruce was trying to say is that you should not get in your mind that "if he throws a punch, I will block with an inside/outside block and reverse punch..." because what if he does NOT throw that punch or if he throws it differently than what you expect? You should let his technique or his attack determine what you do, and not let your per-determined ideas of style or form dictate what you will do.
This is even MORE important when the "opponent" won't attack first. If the guy is obviously violent and attacks you first, there isn't much thought process involved in the decision to defend yourself. If he does NOT attack, then you have to think about whether he WILL attack, or whether you can still talk it out and avoid the fight completely. If at all possible, his "non-attack" should be your own "non-attack" and you should both take part in Bruce's art of "Fighting without Fighting."
Hope this helps...
Sensei Cox

Answer 5

My interpretation of what Lee said has to do with feeling out an opponent's technique(s) while engaging them, not waiting for them to make the first move. The first move doesn't give you much to judge them on anyway, because all you'll have is that one move they just attempted on you (which could be a feint too). To answer your question, I'd say if you had to fight, *and* you had to have them (try to) throw the first blow, do your best to lure them by appearing open and in a position to get hit - but best be alert every second of that maneuver to counter. And good luck.

P.S. > watch their stance(s), look at what they seem to focus on with their eyes, etc. these are keys to their methods of attack/defense.

Answer 6

well... r u shure of that meaning? but neways heres how i c it.. from what little (very little) time i have spent studying zen... when u see sumthin like no technique or beyond technique or breathing or sumthin.. i think it means they dont haf 2 think bout or worry about it... like its 2nd nature...or no technique could just mean... a master never has 2 use it... like there is this 1 parable of this emperror who wanted 2 train a cock 2 fight so he got a trainer 2 train a cock an after a bit he asked if it was ready the trainer said "no, hes strong yes but his stregnth is empty,hot air he wats to fight all the time hes over excited and has no endurance" 1o days later the king asked again "no,no not yet. hes too fierce, hes still looking for a fight all the time. whenever he hears another rooster crowing even in the next village he flies into a rage and wants to fight" 10 more days "now can you organize a fight?"
trainer- "well he no longer flies into a rage, he remains calm when he hears another rooster crowing. His posturwe is good and he has alot of power in reserve. He has stopped losing his temper all the time. looking at him you arnt even aware of his energy and stregnth."
"so we can go ahead with a fight? asked the king.
"maybe."
but no bird would come near that 1 they all ran scared and he never had 2 fight. he was beyond technique all his power was inside he "had no technique"
as for the "his opponents technique his technique" part i dont really know, it could mean that just means he minipulates him and controls him and uses it against him.. like in aikido or juijitsu or sumthin... and if your opponent wont attack first... there is no fight.. so no technique... the "highest technique" according to that is not needing to use a technique... i guess when u hear a guy say that whole "we learn it so we dont need 2 use it" thing.. thats what thier talkin about. but ne ways if they wont attack theres no conflict just be on ur way... if they really wanna fight.. they will come at u then u use thier technique.. or lack of against them.. maby in thier blind rage they charge leaving them selves open u so u knee em in the face or put em in a hold or throw em or... what ever u do..

Answer 7

Being uninhibited by stringent style is better to adapt to the situation at hand. Thus the highest technique-no technique, thereby adapting to any situation that may come.

Also, there are ways to draw your opponent into attacking you. The Late Sifu Wong Tsok used to draw his opponents into attacking with a flinch and drawback, then when the first intentions of your opponent are clear, you may launch an attack utilizing Lin Sil Dai Dar "attack and defend simultainiously" to overcome this opponent.


lr


http://www.pacificwingchunassociation.com
http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/WW_WCKF/

Answer 8

That's not exactly what he meant, by having no technique you have all techniques. Meaning you are completely open to whatever is needed to be done, you can adapt to any situation, if it requires first strike, you strike first, timing is essential, to be in proper time with your opponent, or to be able to change your speed by either slowing down or speeding up in order to get around defences that rely on timing. He more meant no "set" techniques, as in you don't allow yourself to get into a rut and only rely on one style of fighting, you have to be able to apply yourself to any situation and change and adapt to the situation in order to counter your opponents style.

Answer 9

I take it as this, improvise your moves , don't become trapped in your own techniques . If your opponent doesn't attack there is no fight. If you take the attack to your opponent then you must be prepared for anything that person may do.

Answer 10

actually what he said was " to have no style as your style". so it was STYLE and not technique. big difference. He further said that there's no style that is better than other style. if you use a particular style basically you limit your self. as for your second question. He was never big on "pre-emptive" attack. you should only use force as your last resort (meaning being attack)