First Silat Lesson

[NoSword]

From what I've seen of good Silat (e.g. Simon on this board, Steven Benitez etc.), it looks pretty much like what I consider good IMA, albeit with a slightly different flavor. However, I know Silat has been stigmatized as "external" by some. I'd be curious if anyone has anything to say as to why. Is it that the instruction is more technique-based with less dedicated "IP" training? Are the mechanics primarily leverage- and angle-based like "external" Japanese jiujitsu?

Increasingly, I'm seeing merit to training in a paradigm that doesn't separate "internal" from "external" and only operates from a standpoint of "efficacy." However, I already drank the Kool-Aid a while back and can't go back to seeing things from the perspective of "ultimately it's all the same thing."

AK

[chud]

To add to the questions...
I'd be interested in having Simon or someone else who trains Silat define what the art is.
Is Silat just an umbrella term for Phillipino arts like Kali, Escrima, Arnis, etc or is it more defined than that?

[Ian]

What are your thoughts;

I was doing some knife sparring with some guys who cross train in Silat more than i ever have. I noticed they didn't go for the "defang the snake" approach. If i sliced they blocked left and their knife was straight to my face repeatedly. They got me a few times like that. My check hand was close, but they used a one movement block and stab or flick stab and it was fast enough i didn't respond in time.
Brashly aggressive? Or the right approach?

Please read Musashi on stabbing the face and stabbing the heart.

[Tiga Pukul]

From what I've seen of good Silat (e.g. Simon on this board, Steven Benitez etc.), it looks pretty much like what I consider good IMA, albeit with a slightly different flavor. However, I know Silat has been stigmatized as "external" by some. I'd be curious if anyone has anything to say as to why. Is it that the instruction is more technique-based with less dedicated "IP" training? Are the mechanics primarily leverage- and angle-based like "external" Japanese jiujitsu?

Increasingly, I'm seeing merit to training in a paradigm that doesn't separate "internal" from "external" and only operates from a standpoint of "efficacy." However, I already drank the Kool-Aid a while back and can't go back to seeing things from the perspective of "ultimately it's all the same thing."

AK

To add to the questions...
I'd be interested in having Simon or someone else who trains Silat define what the art is.
Is Silat just an umbrella term for Phillipino arts like Kali, Escrima, Arnis, etc or is it more defined than that?

Silat is an umbrella term mostly used for Indonesian and Malaysian martial arts. There is a little bit of silat on the Philippines, but if found there it came from Indonesia.

As for the other question, i can only talk from my perspective (style Bukti Negara, dutch flavour), since there are so many styles:

The instruction is not technique but principles based, there is plenty of training the basics with focus on using the whole body (is this ip?).

As for: "Are the mechanics primarily leverage- and angle-based like "external" Japanese jiujitsu". Well the mechanics do use leverage and angles, i'm not too sure though if that is typically "external", they are just different aspect which can be combined perfectly with using the whole body.

What i do know is that the silat i practice focusses a lot on footwork, to a degree that i never have seen in any CMA (but that also be my limited understanding). Yes people can step of at an angle and call it a triangle, but to the degree in which it's being used in Bukti Negara, i have never seen it in other styles. But then again...i'm biased

More generally, it's very hard to describe Silat. It has styles similar to (and sometimes influenced by) : Wing Chun, Bagua, TaiJi, Wushu, Sanda, Karate, Aikido, Muay Thai etc...

[kenneth fish]

The Silat that I have seen seems every bit as deep as any Chinese martial art, and is probably more practical than most. Of course, from what I have heard (and seen as well) there are entire systems of Silat that seem more like ritual or performance art, so whatever one is exposed to may not be representative of the true breadth of Silat.

[Andy_S]

Silat is a very broad church indeed. In the west it is best known as a martial art, but there are elements of silat that encompasses mysticism, dance/performance art, and even comedy routines. I have never seen western practitioners demonstrating these latter kinds of silat - which is probably a good thing.

I would add that, like CMA, there is an enormous amount of legend, rumour, supersition and simple bullshit in silat. I lived in Malaysia in the mid-1990s and there were a number of Malays who would not practice it for these and other (notably, its cultish side and the sexual abuse of certain students by certain "masters") reasons.

That having been said, some silat is both gorgeous to look at and wickedly effective. However, when it comes to cold weapons, I think the Philippinos have taken the training further, possibly due to the geometric influences and drills of Spanish fencing.

[Tiga Pukul]

Hi Andy_S i agree theat there are diferent mystic or dance like elements. In Holland though these practices were, and still to a degree, are still quite common. When i was young there were plenty of routines in the Indo community where dance were shown (dressed up with monkey or tiger masks), and other routines with people shown in trance, remote knockout, etc. all that sort of stuff.

I don't agree on the weapons part on the geometric influences and spanish fencing drills (i guess you talk about Destreza). In the system we use these geometric patterns to the extreme, and this knowledge is straight from Java (perhaps imported but thats only assumption). Although filippino MA practitioners use those patterns, most people (also higher level (although western)) i noticed that it was often quite superficial. I'm talking about the footwork though, not the use of weapons which can be quite solid in FMA.