Talk:Silat (Malaysian martial arts)

Broken link

Today, the external link does not work. I will check it again next week, if it is still not working, I'll remove it. --zeno 17:19, 24 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Wikipedia:List_of_Wikipedians_by_martial_art add yourself!

Wikipedia:List_of_Wikipedians_by_martial_art

Uniforms for Silat

Are there any keikogi-style uniforms for practicing Silat or can you wear any outfit? --User:Angie Y.

As far as I know, there's no wide-spread use of uniforms in Silat. -Objectivist-C 01:30, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay, so any outfit is acceptable. --User:Angie Y.

Actually the most common uniform for silat is the costume commonly worn by Malay men in the 16th century. This includes trousers that traditionally reach the shins (today it usually reaches the ankles) and a round-collared, long-sleeved shirt with a plunging neckline. A waistband called the kain sampin is tied around the mid-section. This is a cloth tied to one side and can either be worn straight so it almost touches the knees, or folded up so it resembles a belt. The costume is completed with traditional Malay headgear. The costume is usually dark-colored in shades of red, blue or black but sometimes it comes in yellow or bright green. In modern times the trousers usually have rings near the bottom of the pants and an ugly vest (with or without sleeves) is sometimes worn over the shirt. The whole thing has a stiffer, almost starchy feel. The kain sampin is sometimes striped these days too. Yes, it was traditionally also practiced by women and they usually dressed the same way.

Silat's history

The history of Pencak Silat is like what Indon write and the history of SILAT is like what Iijam write --User: St07003603.

What exactly is the history of Pencak Silat? How was it created? --User:Angie Y.

There is no single art and so no single history as "Silat" properly refers to any fighting art indigenous to Indonesia. I'll skim through the ancient history of the movement of people into the archipelago in the first place (as it would be entirely speculative anyway) prefeace by pointing out that we are talking about millions (hundreds of millions) of people over a very geographically diverse region of spice islands which rarely had anything resembling a single government.

Out of these often unconnected villages, tribes, and kingdoms thousands of martial arts evolved... though there are some points that could be made (I need cites).

Realize that even the term "Silat" is not universally applied. There are many different languages and conventions throughout Indonesia, and two people in bascially the same art may not use the same names. That said, I've commonly heard Silat divided into three groups.

- Cultural arts (Pentjak Silat) - Combative arts (Pukilan Silat) - Mixed-Chinese arts (Kuntao)

The usage of these terms varies *heavily* and I don't think that nay noe side is correct over another.

The Cultural arts vary from extremely combatively effective to extremely ceremonial. As an example of the latter: Don Dreager mentions in [i]the Weapons and Fighting Arts of Indonesia[/i] (cited from memory, feel free to fact-check) a style of silat used to ritually challenge a groom at a wedding for his bride (the challenger is supposed to loose).

Generally Indonesia was populated by isolated villages that alternately traded with / killed and ate members of other villages. As such, many of the Silat styles are village arts intended to be useable by both young and old, and with weapons normally carried (short and medium blades). This would be contrasted to, for example, Japanese arts which were often focused on a warrior caste (Samurai).

Though the region has been occupied by many foreign powers, the two most notable seem to be the Chinese and Dutch. The Chinese in particular settled in large numbers and brought with them fighting styles from Southern China. Over the years and generations, these were hybridized with the indigenous styles and there is a distinct group of Chinese-Indo styles of silat.

I'll see if I can expand later, someone feel free to clean this up --Tensin 19:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Moves

Are there diagrams for any of the certain moves in Silat? Angie Y. 23:59, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

• Well, this site: PencakSilat.com has lots of information on Silat, and the "Principles" section has illistrations. You might find what you are looking for there. 151.203.165.151 18:04, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Weapons in Silat

Now I'm looking for information on the weapons. Angie Y. 20:39, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I'll see if I can pull something at least a little authoratative from Dreager's research. In the mean-time...

In modern useage, the most commone weapon is the knife. Most Silat styles are very focused on the short blade. Traditional weapons include the spear, medium blade, and short-bow. The arts are generally very inclusive, and I've seen "official" adaptations for Japanese Katanas and firearms. --Tensin 19:15, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Linkfarm

This article suffers from significant linkfarmitis, with most of the external links being nothing more than advertisements for individual Silat schools, offering little in terms of supporting information for the article itself. If someone else has the time to sort through them and delete the ones that fit this description, great. If not, I intend to do so when I get a chance. -Erik Harris 00:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC) (forgot to sign; timestamp wrong)

• I removed some. The rest of them seem to have useful information. 141.154.151.37 17:45, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Kipas

What's a kipas? Angie Y. 20:48, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I did a google search, and "kipas" is either an Indonesian wall fan, or that cloth skullcap worn by Jewish people (see: Kippah). Unless there is some other meaning that I couldn't find, I'm guessing whoever added "kipas" to the article might have been a vandal. 70.109.228.66 00:35, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Kipas means 'fan' whatever type of fans. (malay)

That's right, kipas simply means fan in Malay

I agree... Kipas means any type of fan in Malay. However, in Silat schools that I observe, the usage of hand-fan is quite are (in Malaysia). Moreover, it was not in any common syllabus of Silats here. Mostly centered around the usage of common Malay weapons such as machete, spears and (but not limited to) kris. Zaidey

Belt system in Silat?

Since there is a belt system for other martial arts, is there a belt system for Silat as well? And if so, which colors—from lowest attainable rank to highest attainable rank—are used in the system? Angie Y. 20:39, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

The belt system comes from Japan and traditionally other styles never used it. So, no, silat doesn't use belts but some modern schools colour the sash worn around the waist for the purpose of rank. I don't know what order the colours come in but I really don't think it's worth mentioning. Morinae 09:45, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Ranking systems vary from system to system. Though there's some degree of standardization in Japanese and Korean arts, the same isn't true in Indonesian arts. Some schools may use belts. Others may use sashes. Others may use some other or no outwardly-visible indicator of experience. —Erik Harris 12:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I get it. So the sashes can be worn like belts. Angie Y. 16:04, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

In silat, it is more common to use a 'bengkung' which would be more like a sash as this would enable the item to be used as a weapon in combat (cindai, chendai) but most systems have belts to show how advanced the student is in the respective arts. Iijam 12:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

True, but the bengkung, belt or cindai as a ranking system is not a traditional part of silat. It's just a modern influence from Japanese and Korean styles. Morinae 08:48, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Infobox

There should be an infobox. :) Angie Y. 15:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Pencak Silat in the Netherlands

I am not sure whether the information about Silat in NL is correct since I live in the Netherlands and even though I practise Pencak, it is generally unknown and certainly not as popular or known as Karate. So I am not sure about what to do next. Is there a reference for that particular statement? --Chingchuanchiu 21:28, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I have a lot of links to Pencak Silat in Holland (and around the world) and articles about the old pendekars who played a major role in introducing Pukulan, Pencak Silat and Kuntao into Holland.

http://www.martialhub.com/indonesia/indonesia.html or Pukulan.com

I would also like to see this link added to the 'External Links' page.

Pencak Silat is not a 'sport' of big organisations, like Taekwondo. It has always been a private art, and as a result, it is best reflected on line by listing the individual schools and masters. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MrSativa (talk • contribs)

Clean up

Would someone tell me why so much notable information has been removed since I last edited this article? It would have been better to at least mention it here first if anyone had a problem with it.Morinae 09:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Dasar pasang, langkah, and djurus

Is there a specific way of showing dasar pasang, langkah, and djurus? What are some of the positions and attacking techniques that a pesilat can use? What are they called? Angie Y. 02:08, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

The beauty of Pencak Silat

Silat is very lovely. Check out this beautiful video I found on YouTube!

[1]

Angie Y. 02:18, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, a lot of people who've only heard of but never seen silat get the idea that it's some kind of primal jungle style but that's just not the case. Even Tom Clancy's Net Force says at one point that "silat isn't pretty" but the Indian and Chinese martial arts that influenced silat were beautiful so it's only natural that the end result was too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.48.52.228 (talk) 04:51, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Clean up

I would like to address the issue of pencak silat and silat here. Pencak or pentjak silat and Silat are different. Pencak Silat is the name of thousands of martial arts that hail from Indonesia. As for Silat, it is specifically for traditional martial arts that hail from the Malay Peninsula which is now Southern Tahiland and Peninsular Malaysia. I would like to ask for the original Silat article to be returned and re-named as Pencak Silat as that is the most appropriate title for it and the current Silat article be retained. Iijam 12:57, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid the sources I've read do not confirm your view that silat is specifically a term describing Malaysian martial arts. Here are some of my sources which dispute your claim:

• "silat is the combative art of fighting and survival believed to have originated from ancient Malaysian and Indonesian civilizations. In Indonesia, the art is commonly referred to as pentjak silat. In Malaysia, the words silat or seni silat are frequently used rather than pencak silat.". Taken from "The Malay Art Of Self-defense: Silat Seni Gayong" by Sheikh Shamsuddin (2005, North Atlantic Books).
• from [2] : "The term pencak silat itself is a relatively recent creation. In contempory usage, 'pencak' and 'silat' are usually interpreted as referring to different aspects of the same practice."

Regarding your claims that silat originates in Malaysia, in my readings I've found that this is one of the myths about the creation of silat. The sources I have say the exact origins of silat are uncertain, but none cite the Malaysian Peninsula as the origin. (Caniago 14:21, 21 October 2007 (UTC))

I beg to differ. This misconception is brought about by ignorance to what the word 'silat' actually stands for.

• Silat dinobatkan Seni Beladiri Terbaik by Tuan Haji Anuar bin Haji Abd. Wahab:
  • Pada umumnya Silat Melayu ialah aliran silat yang diamalkan oleh orang Melayu di Semenanjung Tanah melayu dan daerah bersempadan dengannya. Bagi mengelakkan institusi ilmu kepahlawanan Melayu dikesan oleh penjajah, maka ilmu seni perang Melayu ini ditampilkan dalam bentuk permainan tradisi rakyat yang menampilkan kemahiran mengunakan ketangkasan menyerang dan mempertahankan diri yang dikenali sebagai silat.
    • Translation: Generally, Silat Melayu is an aliran of silat practiced by malays in the Malay Peninsula and regions bordering it. To avoid the institution of the Malay warrior(warring) knowledge being detected by colonialists, the knowledge of the Malay art of war was presented in the form of a traditional folk game in which skills are showcased using agility in attacking and defending oneself which is known as silat.

• Silat itu Satu & Sempurna by Tuan Haji Anuar bin Haji Abd. Wahab:
  • Malaysia telah mengiktiraf silat sebagai Seni Beladiri Rasmi dan tersenarai dalam Akta Warisan Negara (Konvensyen Silat Kebangsaan 2006). Silat telah menjadi satu nama kepada seni beladiri Malaysia...
    • Translation: Malaysia has acknowledged silat as its Official Art of Self-defence and is listed in the Country's Heritage Act (National Silat Convention 2006). Silat has become a name to Malaysian art of self-defence...
  • Pencak silat yang merupakan satu nama bagi ribuan ilmu seni beladiri di Indonesia,...
    • Translation: Pencak silat which is a name for thousands of martial art forms in Indonesia,...

These are excerpts of articles written by Tuan Haji Anuar bin Haji Abd. Wahab, who from his Wikipedia page you can see, is the Grandmaster of Seni Gayung Fatani which has been acknowledged to be an original school of Silat Melayu or Silat by the Ministry of Culture, Arts and Heritage of Malaysia. He been involved in silat for more than 20 years and developed the Kurrikulum Silat Melayu or Malay Silat Curriculum which was a general complete silat curriculum in all aspects which could be practiced by any school of silat in Malaysia.

• "The Malay Art Of Self-defense: Silat Seni Gayong" by Sheikh Shamsuddin (2005, North Atlantic Books):
  • Silat seni gayong is believed to have originated from the Bugis tribe in the Sulawesi island(aka Celebes island).

Sulawesi is one of the four larger Sunda Islands of Indonesia and is situated between Borneo and the Maluku Islands. Thus a martial art hailing from here would be more aptly named as pencak silat. Even in the excerpt you provided it is stated that pencak or pentjak is more commonly used in Indonesia while seni or seni silat is more commonly used in Malaysia. The term Pencak Silat is more commonly used or heard as the art is more popular. This is due to the fact that there are thousands of aliran hailing from Indonesia, even in Malaysia and these styles are aptly named Pencak Silat.... depending on the style and pencak silat has expanded worldwide.

I believe that the proof i have given above is quite sufficient to demonstrate that Silat is a martial art form that hails from the Malay Peninsula where it is also known as Silat Melayu while Pencak Silat is a name to thousands of martial arts hailing from Indonesia. I hope that you will reconsider my earlier request to restore the Pencak Silat article. Iijam 08:19, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Limited View

I have been checking these issues for a month. What can I say most of the Ijam works is based on the valid articles. I understand with Indon argument. But what can I see both of you have made this really works! For me, as Silat and Penchak Silat is two separate entity, it is better if both are you to concentrate on Silat (Iijam) and Pencak Silat(Indon). This is because no matter about publication, but based on my experience most of Pencak silat handbooks in early fifties until seventies is not a good publication materials, bBut still people referred to this publication as their sources. I have checked all Iijam sources and it’s all from good publication. And for you Indon some of your sentence you should write from where you get the information. — St07003603 (reply) — 20:30, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

This article is totally bias. The source is only taken from Malaysian publications and worse that they cannot be verified. I'm sure there are thousands of verifiable-and-reliable publications about Silat or Pencak Silat. Using only a few sources from limited geographical boundary will only provide limited view of the article. I put the tag while I'm trying to find other sources to ensure the neutrality and balance view. — Indon (reply) — 08:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

The sources are completely Malaysian becuse the martial art comes from the Malay Peninsula. If there are sources outside Malaysia that refer to Silat instead of Pencak Silat that you know of, they would be greatly welcome. Iijam 09:23, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

The issue is that the genre of martial arts, most commonly known as Pencak Silat in Indonesia or Silat in Malaysia share a common ancestry going back to the 7th century and they retain many similarities to this day. While it may be the case in Malaysia the term Silat refers to a particular form, Silat Melayu, more broadly in the English language and even in Indonesia this is not the case. The term Silat does not unambiguously refer to a Malaysian form of Silat. What you are doing is trying to force a particular Malaysian interpretation of the term Silat into the global context, and that doesn't work. The book I quoted from uses the term Silat as a general term for the martial arts from both Indonesia and Malaysia. In Indonesia the term Pencak Silat has only been used since 1948, and it was chosen because Pencak and Silat were the two most commonly used terms for self-defense techniques in Indonesia. In Indonesia today, the term Silat is still used and has a specific meaning. What we really need, and what we had until recently, is a general article which contains an overview of various martial arts in the region which can be (and are) described as Silat in the English language. If you want to also create sub-articles that cover the specific aspects of Silat Seni Gayong or Silat Melayu or whatever, this is fine, but they can't replace this general overview article. (Caniago 09:36, 22 October 2007 (UTC))

Okay, I see what you mean but in today's culture, the term Silat is rarely used by Europeans. They call their art, no matter which aliran it may be from as Pencak Silat. And more often than not, it is from Indonesia. So forcing a particular Malaysian interpretation of the term Silat into the global context is not what i am doing. Besides that, I am just trying to clear up a misunderstanding and misconception that has been running for so long, that Pencak Silat and Silat are the same. Despite all this, i would like to apologize if i offended anyone. Either way, can you show me your souces for share a common ancestry going back to the 7th century. With no offence to anyone, i would like to suggest that the book you are quoting from may be biased towards Pencak or its own aliran. The writer i quoted from is a well-known figure in Malaysia who has great credibility and had written vastly about silat. P.S: Silat Seni Gayong and Seni Gayung Fatani are two different and separate froms of silat. They have no ties whatsoever except for the slight similarity in name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iijam (talk • contribs) 01:57, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Besides, even if you read the current article, the divide between Pencak Silat and Silat are apparent. Why not just create another article under the title pencak silat? It has its own history, terminology and styles. I do believe pencak silat has its own separate cultural identity, from its music to its spirituality and costumes. For the current article, we can leave the introduction as it is and the terminology section will explain the divide. The article before this was a biased article which only referred to pencak silat, it's customs, aspects and culture including IPSI and all that. Saying that it was a general overview is nonsense unless you are only acquainted to pencak silat. It is a misconception that has repeated itself thousand of times over the internet and this may be the point where we may break the misconception. Iijam 16:04, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I hope so. Although in my opinion the words "silat" and "pencak silat" refer to same discipline of a martial art form in malay archipelago.We can't deny the fact that both Indonesian and Malaysian people have its own perspective on it. -castromariachi-

if anyone can contribute to the culture section in the new pencak silat article, please do so. I am only familiar to Silat and not Pencak. thanks 60.50.152.27 04:15, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

let's work together

i try to post some articles of Pencak Silat, my object is to give balance between Indonesian and Malaysian perspective. I respect both Indonesian and Malaysian style practioners.Salam —Preceding unsigned comment added by Castromariachi (talk • contribs) 07:32, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Good idea. Shall we propose collab at WP:SEASIA? — Indon (reply) — 08:32, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

sure thing :) bro -castromariachi-

Merge between Silat and Pencak Silat

Please add your comment at the bottom or below one appropriate thread you want to reply.

User Iijam unilaterally separated this article with Pencak Silat while others are trying hard to combine these two article which are actually referring the same. The limited view of Iijam from Malaysian POV brings this article into non-neutral encyclopaedia article, which confuses general readers. We need consensus about this. I propose to merge the two articles. — Indon (reply) — 07:59, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Support per norm. — Indon (reply) — 07:59, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Please refer to the messages I left above in the Clean Up and Limited View sections, I believe there is sufficient proof to support that pencak silat and silat are NOT one and the same. They have different histories, backgrounds, cultural aspects and practices. Even if you combine the articles you will still have an article divided in all its subcategories into pencak and silat. The only limited view held here are by those who refuse to diverge the articles despite the obvious differences between pencak silat and silat. We should move forward not backward, and acknowledge the individualities of these arts instead of trying to force old meanings into the names that define these arts that have expanded into new definitions. If anything, this article will be less confusing than merging both the articles into one. Merging both articles will only confuse exponents to the true nature of their art. If they are new to the martial art, this will help them distinguish theirs from the broad stream of perguruans out there instead of confusing them as to where their art really came from, its background, its history, culture and heritage. PLEASE STOP CONFUSING PEOPLE ABOUT SILAT AND PENCAK SILAT!. It's time we acknowledge the difference and move on. Iijam 08:33, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
  • To Iijam. You don't own the article and you cannot act unilaterally. You removed the merge template and I've reverted because we're still discussing this issue here. Please discuss and don't shout. The only person who divides the article is actually you, while others are trying to balance it based on WP:NPOV. — Indon (reply) — 08:49, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Suddenly this article has become a bit too nationalistic. Silat and pencak silat are pretty much the same thing. Both originated in the Nusantara (just like Rasa Sayang) and share the SAME origin. Iijam's view seems to have a clear cut definition of what is Malaysian and Indonesian but really if you look at the history of Southeast Asia you will find that all the countries are closely connected and you can't always differentiate between the cultures. What difference does it make that the term pencak is used more often in Indonesia than Malaysia? Sepak raga is called takraw in Thai and chinlon in Myanmar but they are essentially the same. In Iijam's defence, however, each name for the sport has a separate article. So I am not opposed to the separation of silat and pencak silat but I would rather that the two be merged. Therefore, it's not necessary to list Malaysia, south Thailand and the Philippines as silat's countries of origin since all of them are part of the Malay Peninsula. And again, all styles of silat originated from the combination of Indian and Chinese styles. Regionally they may have become distinct but this is an aspect of their history curiously ignored in the articles. The second paragraph on silat's history already talks about Champa and silat being practiced in a number of countries. How was it created? Morinae 09:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
  • If you look at the article's history, there've been major revisions from one editor to another, which is pity. Editors should work together. Actually, I prefer Silat describes a general umbrella term with shared history, cultures and maybe forms of martial arts, without tendency to one country view. Then, if Malaysian editors need to expand Seni Gayong, for instance, then they can create more detailed article and link from here with {{detail}} template. Similar with Pencak Silat if there's a need to separate it. I'd say if there is a need, because if the detailed article repeats the general Silat article, then it's useless to have separate articles. That's my 2 cents. — Indon (reply) — 09:30, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• In separating the two articles, i a not trying to be too nationalistic. The reason for the separation is that despite silat and pencak silat may have the same origins, hey have evolved into different martial arts. Pencak Silat has its own identity; it is more notorious, ruthless and it has its own culture. Indonesians have their own form of tengkolok which sometimes look nothing like the Malaysian versions. The way they wear it, tie it and so on also differs, not to mention the entire costume. Malays in the peninsula have traditionally worn variations of the baju melayu fro generations whereas indonesians have had different outfits through the ages and from region to region. Pencak silat even has its own history pertaining to its roles in indonesia since an early age. Silat on the other hand has been acknowledged as originatiing from the malay peninsula and it goes all the way back to Funan and Champa where it was probably still one and the same with pancak silat. These two arts have evolved into separate entities and there are many more justification i can make. but at the moment i am running short of time, and i shall be back when i have some. 60.50.152.27 10:40, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Support - I'd really like to get involved here and provide a detailed and well-researched response, but I'm really short of time. My suggestion is for Iijam to take a broader view and not rely so exclusively on Malaysian literature. I have a similar view to Morinae, that Malaysian nationalism probably taints the Malaysian literature on this topic (and Malay history and culture in general) just a Indonesian nationalism sometimes taints literature on topics like Majapahit. At this point, based upon the literature I've read, I'm against having separate articles. Iijam claims that because there are differences there should be a separate article, but Pencak Silat itself isn't uniform, it's just a very recent Indonesian term for many different martial arts types. (Caniago 12:53, 25 October 2007 (UTC))

• Oppose Silat is a very general term. There's Malaysian, Indonesian, Filipino, etc., silat. Especially in the U.S., Pencak/Penjak/Pentjak Silat is understood in a more limited sense. To me the proposal reads like trying to merge Shotokan with Karate because all Shotokan is Karate. Look here [3] at all the mentions of Filipino and Southeast Asian pencak silat competetions, e.g. [4] (search for "silat"). The term is used differently and merits its own page--after which the discussions of what content is appropriate there may begin. A merge is not appropriate. JJL 13:19, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
  • True. Silat is a general term, but the current status with one editor insists of only using Malaysian POV makes it not the general term, but a limited Malaysian sense. I will agree to your suggestion if the Silat article does not contain merely Malaysian's silat understanding. It's too narrow for such an article. Let's say Silat is the "Karate" article, a general umbrella term that contains shared history of the martial arts coming from SEAsia which originally came from Minangkabau area with Indian and Chinese influences. Then Pencak Silat is the "Shotokan", Seni Gayong is the "Goju-Ryu", etc. However your argument that Pencak Silat is different than Silat is actually incorrect. As Caniago has expressed the additional term "pencak" did not change that the two are different. The only different thing is that in Malaysia they don't use "pencak" and that's it. CMIIW. — Indon (reply) — 13:58, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Hmm.. I do agree that pencak silat and silat came from the same source, and are in essence the same. But the reason they don't use the term pencak in M'sia is that there is a slight difference to the two (pencak silat and silat). Pencak is harder and silat is softer as it should be because it comes from the Melayu who are famed for their softer, polite demeanor whilst pencak is more ruthless, it's harder as it should be as it comes from many generations of mighty warriors who lived unforgiving lifestyles. This alone does not warrant a separation but combined with many aspects of both which vary from each other, it starts to make sense as to why it was re-named to pencak silat instead of just leaving it as silat. Here's what i'm trying to say: pencak Silat and silat are different in:
  • History - pencak silat carries with it the history of indonesia while silat carries with it the history of the malay peninsula all the way from champa; both rich in details pertaining to its home country
  • Terminology - Names, etymology, origins of word, spellings & pronounciation
  • Culture - Clothes (tengkolok (tying &styles), samping (usage, styles), outfits (costumes; baju melayu vs. indonesian warriors)), Music (Silat: gendang; Pencak: gamelan, saluang)
  • Spirituality - while both practice Islamic teachings, pencak has a stronger influence of buddhism and hinduism whereas silat, while tainted by these influences is very heavily Islamic and sticks close to the syariah
  • Style and technique - pencak silat is quite ruthless and efficient in its execution whereas silat definitely has its violent moments, but it still carries on its tradition of silat pulut or silat melayu, which is a soft and flowery game filled with subtle and hidden meanings.

I do not know how to further explain this but to say that pencak silat and silat vary in every aspect, most notably history and culture. With such major differences in these two defining aspects, they have developed and evolved into their separate identities and i think this warrants a separation. The new article itself is quite acceptable in length to stand alone. It just needs some additions and a bit of cleaning up from someone who knows the art well. Despite similar origins. we must admit that they have evolved into separate martial art forms.. Iijam 15:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• i practice both indonesian and malaysian style, although i am indonesian. My teachers, indonesian or malaysian,they think that "pencak silat" and "silat" are the same thing. but yes ,there are a lot of differences between indonesian and malaysian style, even between indonesian styles there are differences too (costumes,history, tradition, technique,etc) . make this more complicated :(... at last,for me it's not the problem if we merge or not the articles (silat and pencak silat) as long we can divide and separate the two perspectives and history ( Indonesian and Malaysian), for example: like Karate's article, they separate Okinawa and Japanese section..salam ;) castromariachi —Preceding comment was added at 15:26, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose - Pencak Silat is from Indonesia. Silat is from Malaysia. I AGREE WITH THAT STATMENT. But peoples always think that both of it is same. Silat is not same as penchak silat. It is not same. It is different.Stop confusing everybody.

This is not about NATIONALITY. This is fact!

For example, Can you see any silat pulut or gayung pulut movements in pencak silat? Do you know SILAT PULUT? DEFINATELY NO!

What can I say, we can see some pencak silat movement in silat but you can't see silat movement in pencak silat. For those who is an expert in this Martial Art will understand of this sentence. If not why can't Taming Sari (the great Majapahit worrior) kill Hang Tuah? – Hang Tuah Won the match against Taming Sari!

There must be a secret in Hang Tuah Movements!

What the secret? To those who are the expert should know it!. ( St07003603 20:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC))

Moved down. Please don't shout, okay? — Indon (reply) — 07:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment - What do you think the Minangkabau word for their martial art is? Silek, which in Minangkabau language means Silat. Do you think the Malays in Sumatra, the area which happens to be the origins of Malay culture, also don't practice Silat? These martial arts were developed long before the Dutch and British colonial powers divided the Malay Archipelago into two. This talk of Silat being Malaysian is nonsense and isn't supported by reliable sources. (Caniago 09:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC))

• St07003603,do you know where Hang Tuah came from? Hang Tuah is Bintanese, from Bintan Island, Riau, Indonesia. Even Raja Ali Haji said that Hang Tuah originally is buginese. That's mean Indonesian people also practice Silat ;) it just a matter of name, which i think is the same. castromariachi

• Comment: Please be focus on the topic. I don't care about Hang Tuah or whoever, but the article should give a correct encyclopaedia material to the readers. — Indon (reply) — 09:57, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• Comment i just try to give a fact that Indonesian people also practice the same form of art martial which called "silat" or "pencak silat". if we want to know silat from malaysian or indonesian's perspective,at least we must know the history castromariachi —Preceding comment was added at 10:02, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I want to resubmit my comment about the issue. I believe this is a good compromise-I think the Silat is still an umbrella term of all the silat styles in Indonesia, Malaysia and other Malay archipelago states. And I believe, in Indonesia, the umbrella term of Indonesian form is Pencak Silat, while in Malaysia it's Seni Persilatan Melayu, as confirmed in the Warisan Kebangsaan (National Heritage)webpage, http://202.187.17.9/~daftarw/index.php?page=warisan_keb_home&subpage=show_detail&category=2&id=134. So we should retain Silat as a general term (to cover ALL silats that is ever existed), and then link it to Pencak Silat (for Indonesia's Silat) and Silat Melayu(for Malaysia's Silat). Is that a good compromise? --Zack2007 01:47, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Agree. A good compromise, Zack. — Indon (reply) — 07:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose the merging and expand the Pencak Silat article

Although it may seem that the two are similar in some ways, Silat and Pencak Silat are different in terms of, say, clothing. Though I also agree that the practictioners of both styles are called pesilat, the two styles are from different countries.

Another thing that the Pencak Silat article is lacking are "Silat in popular culture" and "Silat practitioners" sections. Angie Y. 19:27, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

If only clothing is the difference, then between Pencak Silat groups there are a lot of differences too. Even styles between Pencak Silat groups have a lot of differences. They all come from Silat as the root. In Malaysia, there are also Seni Gayong, Seni Silat, etc. I'd say Zack's argument is the most appropriate one. Do not make Silat as only Malaysian's view. Make it as a general term, then link from it to either Pencak Silat, Silat Melayu, or any other derivatives from Silat. Of course all articles need expansion. — Indon (reply) — 20:37, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

The clothing thing is just an example. Also, consider the fact that some people might get confused. Also, we need to emphasize that some fictional characters practice the art as wel, not just real, flesh-and-blood people. For example, Ulrich Stern is one of the characters in Code Lyoko that practices this martial art style. Angie Y. 00:26, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

• Comment here's some text which seems to clarify why the Malaysians here seem to mistakenly think Silat is a Malaysian martial art (from [5]) - "The word ‘silat’ is generally accepted to be in wide usage in the northern region of the Malay Archipelago which includes Acheh, Kedah and Patani while the East Coast of Malaysia utilize the term ‘gayung’ whereas other areas where the Jawa eventually settled, the word ‘pencak’ came into popular usage. In Johor, the term Buah Pukul is used to describe the Johorean strain of a Yunanese (Chinese) art called Lian. It is unclear to me when the catch all term ‘silat’ began to be used to describe the Malaysian Malay Martial Arts (M3A). However, it seems that this gained momentum in the late 1950s and 1960s when most of our political leaders hailed from the North who often referred to the M3A in their vernacular. [IMHO] Add this to the fact that all four of the founding members of the Malaysian National Silat Federation (PESAKA) hail primarily from the northern states of Plau Pinang, Kedah and Perak and you’re left with little choice regarding what to call your M3A in public. Not all masters accepted this change totally and adopted the term only for identification purposes. For instance, Seni Gayung Fatani is often mistakenly called Silat Gayung Fatani and Silat Seni Gayong called Silat Gayong. To do so would create redundancy (silat silat fatani). This is like the English phrase ‘Rice Paddy Field’ when ‘padi’ in Malay already means rice." (Caniago 02:04, 27 October 2007 (UTC))

• More comments. To add what Caniago has already expressed and to state that I'd prefer more to have Silat as a general term (not only Malaysian's view) and then link from it to more detailed articles (Pencak Silat, Silat Melayu, Silat Gayong, etc.), here what I've found from some sources:
  1. From "The Malay Art Of Self-defense: Silat Seni Gayong" book by Sheikh Shamsuddin (limited preview from google at [6]):

     Silat is a combative art of fighting and survival believed to have originated from Indonesia and Malaysia civilizations and has evolved into social culture and tradition and is a fine physical and spiritual training (see page 1). There is evidence that Chinese and Indian had influenced the martial art. Though its origin is uncertain, silat is a genuine Malay art (read: not Malaysian). History denotes that silat existed as far as the 7th century AD and was refined to become the specialized property of sultans, panglima and pendekar (warriors) during Majapahit and Srivijaya empires, which means silat spread into Malay peninsula, Java, Bali, Sulawesi and Borneo (see page 7). Silat shares the same history in Malaysia (incl. Singapore and Brunei) and Indonesia during the colonization era as a form to liberate from foreign authorities. Now there are Persatuan Silat Kebangsaan Malaysia (PESAKA), Ikatan Pencak Silat Indonesia (IPSI), Persatuan Silat Singapore (PERSIS), Persatuan Silat Brunei Darussalam (PERSIB), as well as in US and Europe, all of which share the same history of silat.

     Note that this source explains more about silat seni gayong which has originated from Bugis and as a derivative form of silat.

  2. From "`Deathscapes' of the Malay Martial Arts" by Douglas Farrer published at Social Analysis, vol. 50, issue 1, 2006 (somebody put the hardcopy in a blog here: [7]):

     Silat is a Malay martial art and folk dance. The term silat is actually a noun which has a formidable arsenal of terms used to refer to martial arts in Southeast Asia. It can be said in Malaysia as seni silat, ilmu silat or seni-belidiri, or in Sumatra as silek and more popularly in Java and Indonesia as pencak silat. Chinese kung fu fused with silat is known as kuntao.

  3. From "Umbuik Mudo and the Magic Flute: A Randai Dance-Drama" by Kirstin Pauka published at Asian Theater Journal, vol. 20, no. 2, 2003:

     Randai is a traditional Minangkabau folk theater which is the cultural identity of Minangkabau people that combines the three oldest traditions: silat (martial arts), bakaba (storytelling) and saluang jo dendang (song-and-flute). Silat was traditionally taught in men's house (surau). When Islam spread throughout West Sumatra, it was eventually taught alongside silat in the surau. Silat is the indigenous type of martial arts throughout Indonesia and Malaysia, and in Minangkabau language it is pronounced as silek.

     Note: this is only a theory that silat may come from Minangkabau area as was included in their oldest tradition of randai dance.

  As a summary, again, I'd prefer to have the general silat article, not to be specific to its derivative form in one specific region. There've been a lot of discourse about silat history and its terminology. I'd suggest to have a look into reliable sources. — Indon (reply) — 07:23, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Oppose: I would just like to repeat, for the benefit of those who have recently joined the discussiond and have not read this:

• Silat dinobatkan Seni Beladiri Terbaik by Tuan Haji Anuar bin Haji Abd. Wahab:
  • Pada umumnya Silat Melayu ialah aliran silat yang diamalkan oleh orang Melayu di Semenanjung Tanah melayu dan daerah bersempadan dengannya. Bagi mengelakkan institusi ilmu kepahlawanan Melayu dikesan oleh penjajah, maka ilmu seni perang Melayu ini ditampilkan dalam bentuk permainan tradisi rakyat yang menampilkan kemahiran mengunakan ketangkasan menyerang dan mempertahankan diri yang dikenali sebagai silat.
    • Translation: Generally, Silat Melayu is an aliran of silat practiced by malays in the Malay Peninsula and regions bordering it. To avoid the institution of the Malay warrior(warring) knowledge being detected by colonialists, the knowledge of the Malay art of war was presented in the form of a traditional folk game in which skills are showcased using agility in attacking and defending oneself which is known as silat.

• Silat itu Satu & Sempurna by Tuan Haji Anuar bin Haji Abd. Wahab:
  • Malaysia telah mengiktiraf silat sebagai Seni Beladiri Rasmi dan tersenarai dalam Akta Warisan Negara (Konvensyen Silat Kebangsaan 2006). Silat telah menjadi satu nama kepada seni beladiri Malaysia...
    • Translation: Malaysia has acknowledged silat as its Official Art of Self-defence and is listed in the Country's Heritage Act (National Silat Convention 2006). Silat has become a name to Malaysian art of self-defence...
  • Pencak silat yang merupakan satu nama bagi ribuan ilmu seni beladiri di Indonesia,...
    • Translation: Pencak silat which is a name for thousands of martial art forms in Indonesia,...

These are excerpts of articles written by Tuan Haji Anuar bin Haji Abd. Wahab, who from his Wikipedia page you can see, is the Grandmaster of Seni Gayung Fatani which has been acknowledged to be an original school of Silat Melayu or Silat by the Ministry of Culture, Arts and Heritage of Malaysia. He been involved in silat for more than 20 years and developed the Kurikulum Silat Melayu or Malay Silat Curriculum which was a general complete silat curriculum in all aspects which could be practiced by any school of silat in Malaysia.

Pencak Silat and Silat have different histories as can be seen in both articles. They both contributed to nationalism in their respective countries. Besides that, original styles from the Malay peninsula have similar traits and conform (to a certain extent) to an overall curricula that defines their persona, such as clothes, (all styles from here wear the baju melayu, samping, tengkolok and bengkung) music, (all styles from here have the gendang as silat music) and the performance of silat pulut (a.k.a silat tari, silat cantik, silat jatuh, gayung pulut). All true and original styles from the malay peninsula have the above whilst pencak silat styles are diverse and have a variety of costumes, use the gamelan or saluang and do not perform silat pulut. Despite the vast range of silat styles in pencak, they too conform to common traits such as country of origin, absence of silat pulut and silat music used. Thus, one can see that these two may come from the same source but are individual arts with regards ro their cultural traits and history. I believe this warrants for a split in the articles and that my above quotes provide the reason as to why the style from the malay peninsula is called silat whilst the style from Indonesia is called pencak silat (as approved by the indonesian govt.) Iijam 13:00, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree with your reasoning, Iijam. Angie Y. 13:29, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Your quoting of Malaysian literature only shows that (some) Malaysians have a very biased and inward view of Malay culture which is not in step with the rest of the world. It also shows your bias. Malay and Melayu does not equal Malaysia or the Malay Peninsula. I've taken the step of forking the Silat article to allow you to add your purely Malaysian POV at Silat_(Malaysian_martial_arts). The Silat article will continue to provide a broader perspective on the term as it is used by the rest of the world. (Caniago 14:11, 28 October 2007 (UTC))

Merge result

After some discussion above, it turns out that Malaysian editors insist to have silat as the article name to explain all forms of Malay martial arts, while others tend to have silat as a general article. To accommodate the Malaysian's POV, Caniago has created a fork for Malaysian Malay martial art form. Thus, the result of merge discussion as follows:

1. Silat is a general umbrella term for martial arts coming form Southeast Asia. All other derivatives, such as Kuntao Silat (Chinese fusion), perisai diri (East Javanese form), Lanka Silat (Philippines' form), Silat Seni Gayong (Malaysian's form), Seni Gayung Fatani (another Malaysian's form), etc., should be briefly presented as described in WP:SUMMARY and give links to them from this article.
2. As for the Malaysian Malay martial arts, the detailed article is Silat (Malaysian martial arts).
3. As for the official term for Indonesian's silat, the article remains as Pencak Silat.

Thank you for all editors that have contributed in the discussion. The discussion above will be put in the Talk:Silat article as reference. — Indon (reply) — 20:02, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Kindly be careful of what Malaysian POV is. The "Malaysian" opinion here is expressed by a Malaysian and is hardly representative of "Malaysian" POV. __earth ^(Talk) 05:43, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I didn't like to use the "POV" word because of WP politics of WP:NPOV, but honestly it is literally said as Malaysian editor's view of what silat is. The discussion has expressed that and even an editor insists to use sources only from Malaysia. — Indon (reply) — 08:16, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Why wasnt this article named Silat Melayu? I think its a simpler title. kawaputra^torque 08:11, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd rather to choose that name also, but I'll let the decision of the name taken by editors who know about this. — Indon (reply) — 08:16, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I support it to be called Silat Melayu, according to the official website I posted before. --Zack2007 10:53, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Disambiguation page

I also firmly brlieve that there should be a disambiguation page for this as well. Angie Y. 22:20, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I guess that a disambiguation page wouldn't be a bad idea but I think it's important for this article to be renamed Silat Melayu. Morinae 10:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Polarisation and Islamisation of silat

For various reasons there has been a sort of rivalry between Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia dating back to the time of their independence from European colonialism. This is particularly so with the Malays of Malaysia and Indonesia which were supposed to be negara serumpun (nations with one root). As a result, all these countries have tried in their own ways to prove that they are distinct from one another. This is common among countries which share the same or similar cultures such as India and Pakistan. Those acquainted with modern Asian history will be familiar with the Islamic Revival which was a political call for Muslim-dominant countries to adopt a stricter, more fundamentalist from of Islamic rule. It didn't hit South or Southeast Asia until the 1980s but it has now affected Muslim communities even in countries where they are the minority. A good example is the origin of silat. During the 60s and 70s Malaysians would avoid association with Indonesia by tracing their silat styles to some Chinese or Indian martial art. Today it's fashionable for Malaysian pesilat to claim that their master's cousin's sister's husband is half Arab. Whether it's true or not they say it so their style has a Middle Eastern/ Islamic connection and no link to icky places like Indonesia or China. The rivalry between Malaysia and Indonesia is thought to be one of the many factors for why the Islamisation movement was more easily accepted in the former than the latter. Today Malaysians seem to have forgotten what Malay culture is and filled in the gaps with Islam to make themselves unique. Putrajaya for example utilizes Arab style architecture because a Malay design would look too Indian, too Minangkabau, too Thai. Compare that to the building's Indonesian equivalent. And while Indonesians are proud of such Hindu-Buddhist kingdoms as Majapahit and Mataram, Malaysians only ever trace their history back to 15th century Melaka partly because it became a Muslim sultanate soon after its founder's death. Ask an Indonesian what was their traditional script before the English alphabet arrived and they'll probably say Javanese or the Sanskrit-based Kawi. Pose the same question to a Malaysian and they'll unhesitatingly answer Jawi, avoiding the fact that even Melaka continued to use the old Indian script long after Islam dominated. Politics had an even bigger role in promoting this way of thinking but I won't get into that. Keeping all this in mind, it was inevitable that sooner or later the effects of Islamisation and polarisation between the Malay cultures would show up in the Wikipedia articles. The prime example here is the split of the Silat article into three but that is by no means the only case. When the Malaysia article reffered to the country's ancient kingdoms, it previously read "these were probably originally Hindu or Buddhist" as if there was ever any doubt of their religion (the word "probably" has since been removed). I can give many, many other examples but I'm trying to get to the silat articles at hand. In the Silat article there are a number of mistakes written in the part on history. One sentence says that silat was originally practiced only by men in the suraus and the art was spread along with Islam. I don't think any historian would agree with this. Let's make it clear that silat was created before Islam arrived in Southeast Asia so it couldn't have spread entirely via the religion. The association between martial arts and places of worship would have come to the Malay peninsula from the Indians or Chinese. It's most likely that silat was taught within the temples as part of a child's education, the same as in the rest of Indo-China. Even after Islam became widespread, it merged with instead of replacing traditional Malay culture (the opposite of what's happening today). It would be logical that after suraus took the temples' place, they still served as educational centres where martial arts would likely have been taught. But this doesn't change the fact that silat was practiced in the Hindu-Buddhist temples before any mosques or suraus were built on Malay soil at all. And the claim that women originally didn't practice silat is a downright lie. It's a controversial fact that Islam changed the role women previously had in Southeast Asian society. It was common for Hindu-Buddhist women to rule a country and, just as in Angkor, they were in charge of the family businesses. The latter is still practiced in some communities like the Minangkabau whose society was traditionally matriachal. It goes without saying that these women were also allowed to practice martial arts just as in India and China from where Malay culture was derived. In fact ancient Indonesian legend says that silat was created by a woman. It's common in many styles that there are certain aspects of training where women and men must be separated. Even today in Chinese Taiji for example although men and women train together, a female practicioner generally does not practice tuishou (pushing hands) with a male simply for practical reasons and not because of religion. This could easily apply to silat especially if training took place in a gender-segregated surau. However, Malay women have always practiced silat and even as recently the 70s you could find kampung (villages) where almost everyone practices the local form of silat regardless of gender. The exponents would all train together but sparring was usually between members of the same sex. Iijam previously tried to show the difference between silat's spirituality in Malayisa and Indonesia by saying that pencak silat has elements of Hinduism and Buddhism but silat Melayu is more Muslim and compliant with the syariah (interestingly he said that Malaysian silat was "tainted" by the Hindu-Buddhist influence). This article also has a paragraph taken from The Malay Art Of Self Defence stating that spirituality in silat is based on Islam and in some regions may have influences from Hinduism, Buddhism and Kejawen. This isn't really a regional difference but a generational one. Not too long ago there wasn't a very noticeable difference between silat's spiritual side in Malaysia or Indonesia. After all, many silat styles practiced in Malaysia came from Indonesia. As has been mentioned, Islam had to carve itself a niche in an already well-established Malay culture so the people originally absorbed the new religion into their own culture sphere. This was possible because the traditional Asian faiths (Hinduism, Daoism, etc) are actually more similar to life philosophies than religions in the western sense. Back when people actually lived their own cultures, they saw nothing contradictory about being a Muslim while following Buddhist principles for example (although most Malays today would probably consider this deviant). Therefore it would be more accurate to say that silat philosophy is based on traditional faiths with Muslim undertones. After the Islamic revival, a lot of silat masters tried to Islamise their art to make it more marketable. It must also be remembered that most styles of silat practiced today aren't that old. This is understandable since the Malay archipelago was colonised for centuries. A lot of the newer styles were created or at least passed on by a generation growing up in the 80s who are more used to seeing Malay girls wearing the tudung (headscarf) than their parents are. They imbue the styles with more Islamic elements because they can't tell the difference between what is Malay and what is Muslim. Rural forms of silat usually have more history and Silat Pattani is considered one of the oldest and most authentic styles of silat Melayu. What was the Pattani sultanate is now split between northern Malaysia and southern Thailand. There was always a large Buddhist population here and this would have its influence on silat. Unfortunately, the PAS government forbids any un-Islamic elements in Malay culture which has forced traditionalists to abandon such practices as meditating in the lotus position which is still done in Indonesia. So the reason for Muslim influence on some Malaysian silat styles is not their land of origin but their age. I think we should stick to what are traditional aspects of the art and keep modern interpretations to a minimum so as not to confuse anyone. And on the above mention of headscarves, they're more common in Malaysia than Indonesia. I imagine that one day someone will claim the tudung to be a traditional part of Malay attire and cite it as an example of the difference between Malaysian and Indonesian clothes even though it is not customary in either country. I'm not trying to fan the fires of rivalry between countries or to denounce Islam and I certainly am not trying to insult anyone here but I just thought people should be aware of where these articles are heading so they can be improved. Morinae (talk) 09:26, 20 November 2007 (UTC)