Silat styles - Charachteristics, Unique identifiers, comparisons

Assalamualaikum.

I apologise in advance if what I have to say offends.

I have a history in Karate (2 years in Goju-Ryu, another 2-3 years in other styles) and am at the moment studying Wing Chun (Ip Man / Leung Ting lineage) kung fu.

I am thinking of taking up Silat, after browsing some of the silat threads here, speaking to a bunch of people who have studied Silat Lian Padukan (among other things) and after checking out some of the website links given on the forum (I was impressed by the UK representatives of Silat Wali Sogo).

I have noticed there are threads here to discuss "What Silat do you practice?" - but I'm more interested in getting to the core of it - what makes your silat special?

Moving from Karate to Wing Chun was quite a drastic move for me - I was used to low wide stances and big telegraphic movements, then moving to Wing Chun with the emphasis on relaxation close range in-fighting, trapping, sensitivity, narrow high stances. Yet I cannot help but think that, Wing Chun was the right move for me - I am most impressed by the emphasis on relaxation to generate power and sensitivity. Fighting at close range has also improved my understanding of body mechanics.

So for me - the charachteristics of Goju-Ryu karate would be a mix of hard and soft techniques, use of small circles. For Wing Chun (Ip Man / Leung Ting) I'd say the emphasis on relaxation, in-fighting, close range, few number of empty-hand forms (count them: four).

I suppose there are hundreds, if not thousands of Silat arts practiced in the world, but I'm interested in what forumites know themselves. At the end of the day - the point is to defeat your opponent, and you'd know pretty quick if you succeeded or not. What I'd like to know is what makes your technique unique.

I am guessing that forumites would say that their individual arts lean more towards "buah pukulan", or more towards "ilmu dalam". From what I've read online, some forms of silat cekak do not emphasise the use of bunga, langkah or kuda-kuda and are a more defensive art. This probably ties in with the peaceful ideal this art tries to achieve.

For reference - the style I would probably learn is http://www.conceptscom.net/silatbrunei/persilatan-sukatan.html

 

Nothing makes it any more inherently special overall. However, what makes it special for me is that it suits me and has worked for me in several real-life situations (some were actual fights and some were just situations where I used what my Silat training had taught me to prevent a fight). The mindset of aggression and close-quarters, using striking to set up balance disruptions, the focus on multiple opponents and weapons (though the bulk of my weapons work actually comes from Filipino MA). All of this suits my personality and preferences to a "T" for a variety of reasons.

One quick example of why I love my Silat training so much happened last weekend. On the weekends, I bounce at a bar. In the time I've worked there (3 - 4 months at this point) there haven't been any major situations. Usually, I ask a guy to leave and he'll grumble and moan but leave without getting physical. Last weekend, though, I had a guy who got out of hand. I told him to calm down and he got belligerent with me so, using my Silat training, I got control of his axis and balance and spun him around then I put a finger on each of his shoulder blades and started walking him toward the door. He kept trying to turn around to confront me but each time, I'd poke him in the appropriate shoulder blade - both preventing him from turning and forcing him to take a step forward to keep his balance. I walked him like that for about 60 feet to get him out the door.

That's the most recent example of how I've used my Silat to control a situation.

Mike

 

Styles ... don't really matter

I suppose that in the grand scheme of things, differences between styles really don't matter too much. What does matter is what works for the individual, and if you get along with your guru / instructor / mentor / sifu.

I suppose each style will have it's own individual emphasis - like how Wali Sogo makes use of the gelek movement to generate power or how Wing Chun emphasises close range fighting ... but in real life terms all that means is it's a case of see what works, improve my basics, practice hard and remember that mastery is a life-long journey.

Thanks for your insight Mike.

 

izamryan is, of course, correct. Inside some pretty broad categories it's the teacher more than the system.

Given that, if you want a decent overview of basic Serak principles and ideas you can go to the website for Guru Plinck's cabang - http://www.pencaksilat.com .

 

Sera and Cimande

Tellner,

http://www.pencaksilat.com/principles.html is just what I was looking for, thanks for the info.

I am beginning to see that early Silat stylists benefited from close proximity to other stylists - there seems to be cross-polination of ideas between styles [2] It's therefore not surprising that Cimande students see some similarities from their system in Sera.

A couple of questions:

a. Does Sera include animal styles like Cimande does? Pukulan Cimande Pusaka [3] includes monkey, tiger, snake, crane and python. On the face of it, Sera seems a simpler style than Cimande.

b. Some of the movements in Sera seems to use a "live" attacking hand and a "supporting" defending hand. Is this intentional? To my eye, the back hand is lending power to the attacking hand when performing mid-arm blocks.


I wonder if Mr Ian Wilson's Murdoch University paper is available on the internet ...


[1] Map of West Java http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Java

[2] Cross-polination of styles http://www.cimande.com/about/cimande/post1.htm and rebuttal http://www.cimande.com/about/cimande/post1_response.htm and again
http://www.cimande.com/about/cimande/hist_cimande2.htm

[3] Pukulan Cimande Pusaka http://www.cimande.com/about/ourstyle.htm

 

izamryan,
Hello, I will answer briefly your questions.
a) Serak has 7 animal "styles" or really Langkas : Dragon, Tiger, Monkey, Snake, Eagle, Crane, and Bat.

b) Serak does use a supported punching structure, but it also has many, many more offensive/ defensive striking structures at its disposal. Serak also has the Tendjekan or Pukulan kickboxing system embedded in it.

c) As for Serak being "simpler" than cimande, well I don't know enough about cimande to have an opinion. You might try Pak Victor de Thouars web site, www.serak.com for more info, or call him to talk about it, he makes his school's telephone # available.

My personal experience with Serak is that it is very complex. Just it's formal structure (Jurus, Latihan, Langkas, Jurusan) alone could comprise a complete system in and of itself. Throw in the sambuts, buangs, angkots, sabets, sambutan, its vast selection of weaponry, grappling, and Tenaga Dalam, well you have a massive art to say the least.

Hormat to you.

 

Getting kinda nitpicky here but I would personally say that what really determines how effective a person's training is will be a combination of things that all contribute dynamically (not in any specific order):
a) how the material in the system suits the individual physically
b) how the training progression and mindset of the system suit the individual mentally/emotionally
c) how the instructor's personality and teaching method suit the individual
d) how well the school overall (the other students and training atmosphere) suit the individual's personality
e) the individual's own drive and passion to pursue their training in that system (which, of course, will usually be affected by how each of the other factors suit the individual)

When it comes to a fight, it doesn't matter what brand name is on the tools. What matters is how well the individual is at using the tools s/he has. That will depend on how effective the individual's training has been and that's all influenced by the above.

There are probably some other details that factor into the overall dynamic but those are the big ones in my experience.

And no matter how long we train or how good we get, all we are doing is stacking the odds in our favor. Nothing will make us invincible.

In fact, I love the attitude of a friend of mine. He said recently (paraphrasing), "If I train to fight for my whole life and die at 95 and have never been in a fight then I will have wasted a lot of training. If, however, I train because I enjoy it and I enjoy the atmosphere and the people around me and I make friends at it and those are my goals in training then when I die at 95 and 200 people come to my funeral to bid me farewell then none of my training time will have been wasted because my goal was to have fun and make friends and I achieved that."

So, for me, the enjoyment of training (which is impacted by the list above) is the bottom line and really determines whether someone will stick with the training or not and determines, to a large degree, how far someone will progress in their training.

Mike

 

Glad it was useful.

Every style is the result of cross-pollination. People learn what other people do and how to deal with their tricks.

Cimande is one of the most influential Silat systems and possibly one of the oldest. Bapak Serak must have either learned some, come up against people who had done Cimande or otherwise been familiar with it. It's kind of like Western boxing. If you grow up in the US and are interested in fighting (or are just unlucky) you can't help but be familiar with boxing. If you're serious about stand up fighting you'll pick some up or at least learn to deal with it.

Sera doesn't have animal forms.

Simple is a tricky thing. Serak has a small formal curriculum, but there's enough there to keep a motivated and intelligent person busy for a very long time.

It's one of several ways the system uses backup. The same motion encompasses many different methods and techniques. For instance, the supporting hand can guide while the attacking hand provides the power. Or the punching hand can be soft while the backup hand provides the strength. The back up hand can cover while the attack hand hits - like a linebacker blocking for the runner. The attacking hand can stop and let the support hand take over. And so on.

Like so much else the root movement is deceptively simple.

 

I think there's a difference between the Sera you're referring to and the Serak that the responders are posting about. They are not the same.

 

Yes and no. Guru Victor de Thouars learned his Serak from the same person my teacher did - Pendekar Paul de Thouars. Guru Sanders spent a fair amount of time with the de Thouars family at one time although he has studied with others. While there is certainly some divergence in styles it is the same system at the root. Sera/Serak/Serah are just differences in pronounciation.

 

Yup, it is not surprising at all to see some crosspollininzation of styles particualarly in a region like Indonesia/Malaysia and even in the Phillipines you will see some "sharing" of styles and techniques. The extent of which would be speculative at best. Cimande was and remains to be a very popular style, and whether Pak Sera was influenced by it or endeavored to counter it who can say? (Although many people seem to have their opinions)

I've found that when dealing with the various styles and history of Pentjak Silat you are going to find yourself faced many times with different sources giving you contradicting facts. Some of these are fact, some are mistakes, some are misinterpretations, and some, unfortunately, are political misinformation (Sadly sometimes even within a single art [edit: Case in point, some of the responses following this one in the thread]). I've found the best way (at least for me) is to absorb everything but take it all with a grain of salt. Personal loyalties cause me to take a particular view but I'm certainly willing to listen to other people's take on things.

Yes indeed. As SerakMurid pointed out Serak contains several animal forms (or Sikaps) however I think it should be pointed out that these are generally integrated fairly seamlessly into the system, at least in the earlier phases. What I mean to say is they are not specific subsystems the way they tend to be in other arts I've seen. There are specific movements and techniques throughout the system of Serak that come from the animal sikaps (ie Sambut Empat utilizes kalong and monyet techniques but its not specifically identified by those animal forms), its not until later that you start breaking down and studying (and when I say 'study' I mean exactly that. 'Study' not 'practice.' You've been 'practicing' the techniques for awhile by this point.) as cohesive patterns.

Its this earlier incorporation of the animal techniques that might give some people the assumption that they don't exist in Serak, but they are definitely there. However if you are hoping to just learn "Tiger Style Serak" then you would be disappointed. There is simply no such thing.

Not sure what you mean by "simpler." From my observation Serak certainly is more 'direct' than Cimande Pusaka appears to me (no offense intended) but I wouldn't categorize it as "simpler." Serak may appear to be less involved than some other systems, but (and again, this is just my take on it) I feel this is mainly due to two things. The first is the previously mentioned directness. Serak tends to focus more on the "silat" aspects (the actual combat) and not so much on the "pentjak" (performance or expression [yes, I know the translation is more complex than that]) as some other arts do. Consequently its a lot less "flowery" and artistic looking. It is also a very close range art so a lot of its intricacies and complexity is not always immediately visible. I can't really comment as to how "complex" other systems might be simply because I don't have much first hand knowledge of them, but I can assure based on how much of Serak I have yet to learn that it is *far* from a "simple" art.

From what I can tell, you are referring to what we call kilap (or kilat) strikes. If that's what you are referring to than I have to say that you really need to see these in motion to get a sense for how they are used. Pictures and diagrams can be a little misleading. Its really used more with a "percussive" attitude than a "bracing" or "supportive" one.

Hope all of this made sense and helped a bit.

 

<<Originally Posted by Ular Sawa
I think there's a difference between the Sera you're referring to and the Serak that the responders are posting about. They are not the same. >>


Pak Vik's Serak looks very different than what I have seen Pendekar Paul Dethouars teach my teacher Guru Cliff Stewart and what he taught Maha Guru Stevan Plink. To me in my humble opinion and with all due respect it looks more like A little Serak with a lot of Aikido. Also From what I have seen from Guru Sanders his djurus look like Tongkat Djurus from Pak Vic.

So in that respect no they (Pak vic's serak, and Pendekar Paul 's Serak are not the same. But at the core of what Pak Vic does is from Pendekar Paul. In the curriculum as Tellner has explained there is no real emphasis on "ANIMAL" styles there is just Djurus, Langkahs, Sambuts, Kilat Striking, Pukulan, Gaurdian Way or hand, Sticky hands, sticky body (Sambutan) and off balancing and internal principles of combat.

Although yes some of the moves may look like a tiger or a snake fist (as seen in some of the Butki Negara stuff). At its core, serak players focus on the Pentjak... the method of fighting. It (the art) and the player doesn't waste time in over mystifying combat it just gets the job done in the most effective way possible.

Although maybe in the old days Sera from Silat Tuo Indonesian way may have had more Animalism. THe Dutch Indonesian Serak doesn't have such an emphasis. It could be that Pendekar Paul didn't to teach the animal aspects simply becuase it may have confused westerners...Who knows?????

But truthfuly only one person would know that.....Guru Stevan Plinck. I guess we could email him and find out. Guru Cliff said to me that Pendekar Paul did teach Guru Stevan the Silat Tuo (old Way) way of doing Serak. So I am sure he does know the answer. If the animal aspects where such a big deal , Pendekar Paul, Guru Plinck and Guru Cliff would be teaching them. So again i don't think its such an important aspect in Serak. Not to say it may or may not have value.

I think the animal aspects become more important when you are studying an art like Wali songo or any of the Ground fighting from sumatra because you need the "Animal" to understand the attitude and the postures used in combat. I could be wrong but it seems to me that Serak is more influenced by the Kilat or Kilap and having more emphasis to be like lightning than any other object or archetype.

peace
silatyogi

 

I won't open that particular can of worms too far, but it is useful to know that before a number of unfortunate things happened Guru Sanders trained with Guru Victor for quite a while. It would only be natural that his Serak resembles Tongkat.

No need to email Guru Plinck. Tiel and I asked him the same question years ago when we started training with him. His answer was that it isn't part of Serak the way he learned it. He also said something (it's been a while, so this may not be accurate) about fighting like a tiger being fine for tigers, but we are human beings, so we need to learn to fight like human beings.

Todd

 

<<No need to email Guru Plinck. Tiel and I asked him the same question years ago when we started training with him. His answer was that it isn't part of Serak the way he learned it. He also said something (it's been a while, so this may not be accurate) about fighting like a tiger being fine for tigers, but we are human beings, so we need to learn to fight like human beings.

Todd>>


There is an interesting approach to the "Human" way of fighting in BK frantzis book the power of internal martial arts.

Which basically says

"Animal way : A violent situation arouses animal instincts which lead to fear which activate the glands which raise the heart rate, which engages the body, and it fights.

Human Way :

Violent situation arouses instantly the human ability to detect how to best handle the situation without stressful anger , mind/body become tranquil and highly alert, which allows the focused mind to activate the chi which causes the body to engage with speed and power but with out the glands becoming activated or the heart beat rising, or anger being generated. At the human level of martial arts it is the intellect that masters the actions of the bodycalmly and dispassionately; that is the decision of how to act is made by your mind, not your glandular system. " Pages 9 - 10 by B.K. Frantzis

 

Hi Izamryan,

I would like to put Silat in another perspective, assuming you originated from the Malay archipelago, where Silat is derived from you may understand a bit of mumbo jumbo which I would like to make an impression of.

First, there are straightforward Silat of various types and there are not so straightforward Silat. For the straightforward ones, the basis of stance (kekuda), techniques (buah/jurus), locks (kuncian) etc can be disected as you were to disect another types of oriental MA. Why is Wing Chun not similar to Hung Gar? What's the difference between Shotokan and Goju Ryu? Same reason would you ask why HArimau and Cimande has its difference. At the end of the day, since you are used to both hard and soft art, the training regime would be the best answer for you.

Secondly, even in Silat there is politics. You will find that two silat associations having the same silat style. A bong sau is a bong sau in almost all types of Wing Chun, but Chum Kiul steps may be different. The same argument applies,..when put together it all relates to the same founder or Mahaguru.

Thirdly, there are magical elements in the not so straightforward silats or better known as Batin. Notice that I do not consider BAtin equal to Tenaga Dalam (or chi in Kung Fu) since there are silats which are not opened to public which require the presence of third party being. With these magical elements, you may be powerful, but at the end of the day, men are only mortals, as decreed by Islam,Christian,Jews, Buddhism, etc

My two cents worth.. looking at it from philosophy and scientific point of view. BTW, out of curiosity, where is your location currently?

 

My only request at this point is this.

No matter your basis/background/politics, please give people the respect by naming them their proper titles....

pendekar, not guru..... there are those here who know what i mean.... if you are not a silat player this isnt so important.

 

With all due respect, though, I don't think any pendekar would be offended to be called guru.

Also, if I'm not a student of the person then I often just refer to them as "Mr." but sometimes I use other titles based on the context of the discussion. All of them are terms of general respect. If I'm not a student of the person or in the person's lineage then general respect is all I think is necessary.

Mike

 

I feel the same way, I feel that by saying guru he was respectful.

 

Possibly, I dont know in this case. But Ive known people who deliberately title a person lower than their recognised one because they disagree with it, or dislike the person in question.

This is the attitude Im trying to avoid here.

 

That would be directed at me. The discretion is appreciated but not necessary.

No disrespect is meant by the use of "Guru". I refer to pretty much everyone by that title except for one or two people out of habit and out of specific requests. This includes my own teacher who is entitled to several grander monikers than "Guru", Cliff Stewart with, as Massad Ayoob says, "more black belts than a men's clothing store" and Dan Inosanto who has as many titles as amazon.com and the House of Lords put together.

It's like people who teach at universities. Even if someone is Department Chair, Distinguished Professor, Fulbright Scholar, LLB, DsC, PhD and Nobel Laureate with an OBE tossed in he's still "Dr. Bloggs" or "Professor Blogs" most of the time.

If someone wants to be put above the level of Richard Feynman and Dan Inosanto I'd be willing to do so if he asked. But it seems a little pompous, don't you think?