Talk:Kalaripayattu/Archive 1

message: Look, why don't you open up any edition of Encyclopedia brittanica or any historical textbook.  You are making up history.  There is no evidence to show that Bodhidharma was a martial arts practitioner of kalaripayattu and no evidence to show that kalaripayattu existed before the 13th century A.D. None at all. Your legends of bodhidharma are all from Chinese legends that were written centuries after the creation of Zen (Chan) Buddhism in China.  No historical texts from the 5th century A.D. in India mention kalaripayattu or Bhodidharma.  Go and read some textbooks before you make crap up and put it online.  You keep on referring to some "ancient" textbooks that talk about the creation of kalaripayattu but there are none. Then you refer to religious textbooks that don't even mention kalaripayattu.  There is no evidence.  You base your history on legends.  IF that were true, then why don't you mention the legends of the origin of kalaripayattu from the Middle East or from some God-King?  This is history that we are dealing with, not mythology.  You are only doing your history a disservice as very few people when they read this believe what you are writing. kennethtennyson
:While I have no dog in this fight, and the above paragraph is not directed at me, since the user who wrote it——protested to my reversion of his/her reversion, I'll explain my actions here. This user did what looked like a wholesale reversion to the June 8 revision of this article, completely disregarding edits made in the intermin. No edit summary was given. The revision the user reverted to was also suspect in its improper use of a byline (user signature). I suspect this anonymous user is in fact either User:Vrmanoj or User:Kennethtennyson. I will not revert again provided that care is taken to preserve uncontroversial edits and that the byline is not included. -- Hadal 03:44, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Who are you?

message: First, please do not quote any books by the author Terrence Dukes.  Unfortunately, he is not a trained historian, rarely visited East Asia before writing his historical book on Martial art and its link to religion, not trained by any true martial artist, wrote articles under a dubious Japanese name, plagiarized what he did write from previous historians, and after plagiarizing what he wrote historically, made dubious conclusions from tidbits of facts.  Further, he began training other students during the 90's and was involved in an unfortunate scandal with his female students.  His book has lead to terrible interpretations of martial arts history. 
Second, legends on Bodhidharma are just that legends.  He probably existed but if you really read the first few stories cited about him by Chinese historians he was from Central Asia.  His origins and his life story has changed and evolved throughout history.  
Third, Bodhidharma only existed in Chinese and Japanese literature. No reference to him in India.
Fourth, the earliest Chinese texts written a century after his death only speak of Bodhidharma teaching the monks meditative exercises and that was after meditating 9 years in CHINA. It wasn't until a few centuries after that, that his story changed and evolved and people began adding on to his legend.
Fifth, no chinese texts ever mention kalaripayattu.  However, Many chinese texts mention the existence of martial arts in china going back to the Warring states period (700-300B.C or so).
Sixth, no kalaripayattu legends in India or texts in India have ever mentioned Bodhidharma and linked it with kalaripayattu. This link only began being fabricated recently in the last decade with the advent of the internet and on kalaripayattu websites.  The Chinese legends are clear that if Bodhidharma did introduce something, he introduced meditative exercises to strengthen the monks and he did this while meditating in China.  This whole bodhidharma thing with kalaripayattu is a recent phenomenon and the people spreading it are all kalaripayattu practitioners or people running Hindutva websites.  If we are to go by oral legends (That constantly change) then we should write down in the history of kalaripayattu that it began in the middle east by some god-king as that is the legend.  We date the origins of things by evidence.  The earliest evidence for kalaripayattu date to 16th century A.D. (C.E.) descriptions and they mention that it might have been present in kerala during the 14th century.  Some Indian historians try to pull it back to the 11th centruy A.D. but through speculation and without any evidence.  If kalaripayattu was so evident throughout Kerala's history going into 200B.C. or so, wouldn't there be more evidence of it?  Archeology?  Written text?  Further, using Christianity as an example of history without evidence of its existence is faulty because there was actually evidence in Roman literature dating to the time of Christ that state that the Romans were persecuting the early Christians.
Finally, ample evidence exists in China that Wushu (which the chinese call their martial arts) began sometime in the Warring States period 5 centuries before the birth of Christ.  If Bodhidharma transfered martial arts to china from India along with Buddhism as many kalaripayattu websites contend in 500 C.E. (A.D.) or so, how could he have done it 1000 years before his birth and 600 years before Buddhism ever came to China?  The fact that I've been trying to give hard evidence and I run up against the same arguments that base their evidence on rumor, legends, and facts that have no supported evidence suggests to me that I am dealing with radical and partisan elements.   Kennethtennyson 08:50, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whoever has been trying to edit article please read 

message: When this page is unlocked, please fix the link to "British" in the History section so that it points to United Kingdom. Cheers! -- BD2412 talk 01:04, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
:done. Thryduulf 23:17, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation link repair request 

message: This page has been protected since 29 June, and it isn't immediately clear from this page whether the discussions have come to any agreements or not. If there is consensus here that protection is no longer needed please make an unprotection request at WP:RFPP (I will not be watching this page). Thryduulf 23:17, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unprotection? 

message: Obviously, there is a dispute going on between the history of kalaripayattu; I've placed the dispute tags and placed both versions of the history online.  I've removed the long discussion about kalaripayattu and the conspiracy theories about people trying to "disrepect" the art as it seems more of an opinion than a text in an encyclopedia. Hopefully, this will prevent future edit wars. Mano1 01:41, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Compromise

message: Made some minor revisions that were confusing to the reader (confusing to me also and I actually have read site over various iterations since it was locked).  Hopefully this will make the text flow more evenly.  The whole discussion on Hindutva and whether or not Chinese, Japanese, Indian or Buddhist religious entities were the people making the claim about kung fu being descended from kalaripayattu was confusing and distracting; as far as I can tell, only one or two people who have ever written a book ever mention kalaripayattu, bodhidharma, and kung fu in one sentence as most people were unaware of kalaripayattu until recently. But the question is not who is making the claim but what the true origins are. Regardless, this is an interesting discussion.  Mano1 01:11, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Minor revision

message: This entry really needs to keep its spellings of kalarippayattu terminology straight.
Let's start with the name of the art itself. I use "kalarippayattu" because that's the spelling Zarrilli uses, but the title of the page is "kalaripayattu" with only one "p". I've seen it rendered variously as a "kalari payatt," "kalaripayatt" "kalari payattu," "kalaripayattu," "kalarippayat," and "kalaripayit," all on a single web page.
There's already another wikipedia entry entitled "Kalari Payattu", though it's a poorly written, inaccuracy-ridden stub. (The author locates the Shaolin Temple in Tibet.)
I've already created two Redirect pages, one for "Kalaripayit" and one for "Kalarippayattu."
On this page, we have "verum kai" and "verumkai," as well as "mei payattu" and "meyppayattu". (Zarrilli uses "meippayattu".)
So are we going to render terms as one word or two?</br>And how are we going to spell them?
JFD 02:00, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Spelling

message: Were there really no references to kalarippayattu in Indian sources earlier than Barbosa's Description?
: [T]he question is not who is making the claim but what the true origins are.
True, but when a particular issue is highly contentious, citing sources becomes especially valuable.
JFD 01:28, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you read Zarilli and other accounts, there are legends within kalaripayattu's history that speak of this god-king who brought kerala from the sea who created it.  Also, within their oral traditions they speak of some legendary being from the middle-east.  Some people would like to state that the religious textbooks in india speak of some god-kings who had to learn combat by bow and arrow and by hand but it doesn't really describe it in any way.  But almost all religious texts speak vaguely of warfare and combat (think Gilgamesh and the bible).  That isn't really a description of martial arts as we know it and as far as I can tell no ancient texts have descriptions of how they trained in combat or any of the types of training that is associated with kalaripayattu.  Kalaripayattu is pretty unique.  If you read how kalaripayattu practitioners train and read zarilli's book, it is more of a war-like dance with some elements of self-defense than a full blown self-defense regime like you would associate with boxing, wrestling, or tae-kwon do.  There's also a lot of massage and ayurvedia associated with it.Mano1 02:29, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  ATTN: Mano1 

message: [Bodhidharma's] early sermons were not only rich in Indian linguistic flavour but were filled with Indian geographical references e.g. 'sands of the Ganges'.
I would love to read these sermons. Are they collected in a book or can I find them online somewhere?
With reference to Boddhidarma, do you not think that it is unusual that you have chosen to lock on to the few ambiguous references claiming he was Central Asian instead of the majority of your very own Chinese and Japanese references, citing him as being of Indian origin?
This reference comes from a source you consider credible enough to cite as proof of Bodhidharma's existence.
; Your words : On the internet, propagandists disclaiming his existence remark that historical record of Bodhidharma did not exist until centuries after his death. Yang Xuanzhi describes Bodhidharma in the earliest surviving mention of him in "The Record of the Buddhist Monasteries of Lo-yang", a 547 Chinese text. Yang tells of meeting Bodhidharma at the monastery of Yung-ning.
; My words : [I]n the earliest surviving mention of him in the "The Record of the Buddhist Monasteries of Lo-yang" (547), Yang Xuanzhi describes Bodhidharma specifically as a Persian from Central Asia (Wade-Giles: po-szu kuo hu-jen) (Broughton, 1999).
At that time there was a monk of the Western Region named Bodhidharma, a Persian Central Asian. He traveled from the wild borderlands to China.
And for anyone who cares to read the whole thing:
Yung-ning Monastery was erected by Empress Dowager Ling of the Hu family in Hsi-p'ing I [516 CE].... At that time there was a monk of the Western Region named Bodhidharma, a Persian Central Asian. He traveled from the wild borderlands to China. Seeing the golden disks [on the pole on top of Yung-ning's stupa] reflecting in the sun, the rays of light in the wind, the echoes reverberating beyond the heavens, he sang its praises. He exclaimed: "Truly this is the work of spirits." He said: "I am 150 years old, and I have passed through numerous countries. There is virtually no country I have not visited. But even in India there is nothing comparable to the pure beauty of this monastery. Even the distant Buddha realms lack this." He chanted homage and placed his palms together in salutation for days on end.... Hsiu-fan Monastery had a statue of a fierce thunderbolt bearer guarding the gate. Pigeons and doves would neither fly through the gate nor roost upon it. Bodhidharma said: "That catches its true character!"
[T]o claim that Boddhidarma came from Central Asia does not discount the fact that he originally was from India.
Here is what Stephen Broughton's endnotes for the above passage have to say:
The intriguing line, of course, is po-szu kuo hu-jen ("a Persian Central Asian"). According to Berthold Laufer, Sino-Iranica (1919; reprint, Taipei: Ch'eng Wen Publishing Company, 1978), 194-95, the term hu relates to Central Asia and particularly to peoples of Iranian extraction. What we seem to have is an Iranian speaker who hailed from somewhere in Central Asia.
To claim Boddhidarma was anything but Indian is to label one of your own grand masters, Hui Neng I believe, a complete fabricator. For wasn't it him that described Boddhidarma's lineage.
I do not claim that Bodhidharma was "anything but Indian."
I pointed out that Yang Xuanzhi says that he was Persian, which you omitted, even though you were otherwise happy to cite him.
Moreover, I also pointed out those authors who do say that he is Indian. And no, it was not Hui Neng who described Bodhidharma's lineage; it was Daoxuan.
; My words : Of the primary sources on Bodhidharma, the "Xu Gaoseng Zhuan" (645), written roughly a century after Bodhidharma's death, and those texts which copy it, the "Zutangji" (952) and the "Jingde Chuandenglu" (1004), identify him not only as South Indian, but Brahmin.[Bodhidharma], the Teacher of the Law, was the third son of a great Brahman king in South India, of the Western Lands. (Suzuki, 1949)The "Biography" (pre-645) by Tanlin, the original which the "Xu Gaoseng Zhuan" copies, does not specify his caste.
I presented what all of the primary sources had to say about Bodhidharma's origins—without self-serving omissions—and let the reader make up his or her own mind.
Boddhidarma was described by your Chan Buddhist figures as being from the Kshastriya caste.
The Chan Buddhist figures Daoxuan and Daoyuan both describe Bodhidharma as being from the Brahmin caste.
If you're not familiar with this caste it means they were born and bred to be priests, teachers, and scholars. The most observant among them eat a sattvic pure vegetarian diet, avoiding even vegetables such as onion and garlic because their pungency supposedly arouse base urges for violence and lust. Such a diet is followed not only by observant Hindu Brahmins, but also observant Jains and, yes, observant Buddhists.
How can we prove someone existed unless we knew him personally, had a photo of him, or knew someone who knew him/her, or had scientific evidence? That is why we base our theory on literary texts and historical references.
Exactly, so if you would be kind enough to cite the specific literary texts and historical references that you are basing your theory on, your readers would appreciate it, such as naming those Chan Buddhist figures that describe Bodhidharma as Kshatriya and in which texts they do so.
So of course Zarilli would not be able to find any connection with Kalaripayattu and Boddhidarma because how or where would he find it?
So how and where are you finding it, Morfeen?
Your mistake is in relying on texts written by individuals who had no intimate understanding of Asian culture and history.
Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki has no intimate understanding of Asian culture and history?
You cannot hide behind some obscure text written by an author you personally favour because he supports your view and slag the ones that run against the grain of your stand.
Suzuki is hardly obscure. Moreover, I'm not the one presenting distortions and misrepresentations of Yang Xuanzhi and Terence Dukes to support my view.
You imply that kalari did not exist before 1100AD but what evidence do you have?
All I do is note that the Barbosa reference dates kalarippayattu to c. 1500, Zarrilli to the 12th century, and Pillai to the 11th.
If you want Wikipedia to reflect your assertion that kalari existed before 1100AD then please name the sources that support that assertion unless, of course, you have something to hide.
The fact is you are in no position to discount the evidence that suggest a possible link between Boddhidarma and Shaolin martial arts purely because you do not have enough evidence to suggest otherwise. Your attempt at trying to cover up possible links would be nothing short of censorship.
As is your attempt to silence those who point out the gaping holes in your hypothesis.
If you'll note, Morfeen, I did not delete your interpretation of Terence Dukes' theories, the conflicting claims about Bodhidharma's birthplace (Tamil Nadu or Kerala), and the supposed inscription on the Shaolin Temple Mural ("Tenjiku Naranokaku").
I did little more than point out what the literary texts and historical references actually said.
The fact, Morfeen, is that it is you are in no position to discount, distort, or misrepresent literary texts and historical references purely because you do not have the evidence—direct or circumstantial—to make your case.
I am done with repeating myself and will not partake in this verbal exchange any longer. I will not tolerate gross censorship and the manipulation of literary material to serve personal ends[.]
If I were a "Chinese nationalist" manipulating literary material to serve personal ends, why would I have added all this:
Kalarippayattu (Malayalam: കളരിപയററ്) is a martial art practiced in the Indian state of Kerala and the Kodagu district of neighboring Karnataka....
Tradition attributes kalarippayattu and indeed Kerala itself to Parasurama, sixth avatar of Vishnu....
Related to the point of indistinguishability to the Southern style are the Tamil martial arts practiced in the Travancore district of Kerala and the Kanyakumari district of neighboring Tamil Nadu that variously go by the names ati tata (hit/defend), ati murai (law of hitting), varma ati (hitting the vital spots), or chinna ati (Chinese hitting) (Zarrilli, 1992). These arts claim descent from the rishi Agastya and, compared to kalarippayattu, place more emphasis on empty-hand techniques and less on weapons.
I, at least, have been doing heavy lifting to "clean up this page to conform to a higher standard of quality" while you abuse Wikipedia by doing nothing for this article except reverting to your POV rant.
Moreover, I made a point of citing sources precisely because this is clearly a matter of such contention while you either refer vaguely to "historical texts" or misrepresent those authors you actually bother to name.
I will persevere in my efforts to promote the freedom to post material that will ultimately aid individuals on the path to making their own choices and forming their own opinions on the subject.
As shall I.
At least we have that in common.
Good day.
JFD 21:19, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Further, Morfeen, you shouldn't imply that I am JFD, as I am not.  He's done a pretty good job of cleaning up this page, though.  Kennethtennyson 04:17, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  ATTN: Morfeen 

message: Please remember that wikipedia articles are intended to be encyclopedic in nature, with a neutral point of view, and referencing. Please do not the treat wikipedia articles as opportunities to impose your own unreferenced and rambling and highly opinionated personal essays over existing text. If you want to introduce new content or views, treat the old content with reasonable respect (don't simply delete entire sections), write in a formal, neutral, encyclopedic style (NOT as if you're writing a personal essay or speech) and provide references for your claims Bwithh 04:24, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: '''Wikipedia articles are not Internet discussion forums'''

message: the source quoted is a travel agent website run by a travel agent who is quoting himself as a source of the history of kalari and the sangam literature.  Kennethtennyson 17:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: sangam literature

message: Wiki Raja 10:36, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProject Dravidian civilizations

message: :Image:Kalari myth 2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 23:13, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Kalari myth 2.jpg

message: Is it capitalized, like a proper name, or lower-case, like karate?  It's not harmonized throughout (or even in sections), and it should be.  If it's only capitalized because It Is Really Important, it shouldn't be per MOS:CAPS.  Zarrilli, publishing in a peer reviewed journal, does not capitalize.  WLU (t) (c) (rules - simple rules) 15:38, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization 

message: In the TV documentary show "Deadly Arts" the host visits a Kalari guru who attempts to apply Marmam techniques on her.  When they completely fail to do anything he brushes it off saying "well you are a woman" however the show pointed out that these criticisms are commonly levelled both at Kalari and other pressure point based martial arts.  See: Josette_Normandeau for details on the program.64.201.173.189 (talk) 22:23, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deadly Arts and Marmam 

message: please improve these two Kalarippayattu related pages,
# Kalari Exercises
# Vaytari
--V4vijayakumar (talk) 08:59, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New kalari ralated pages 

message: I just added a couple cleanup tags - they should be easy to take care of if the editor who placed the citations is still active here.  I was looking over the article, and it seems to me that it is an excellent candidate for GA nomination. It is perhaps not quite there, but very close.  Going ahead and submitting it might be a good way to get some feedback on where improvement is needed.  Although there seems to be about a month turnaround for articles added to the GA nomination page, so if you submitted it now, you'd have about a month before anyone got around to reviewing it.  Just a thought - the article is looking great. Bradford44 21:25, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup and potential GA Nom

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests - No timestamp given 
;What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:23, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Urmi-Payattu.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: Huge sections of this article are either unsourced or poorly sourced. Examples include those concerning the various exercises and styles. I have tagged the entire article as a consequence of this. I have no reason to disbelieve any of the statements made but some additional verification would be useful, if only to eliminate the possibility of original research being present. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 08:14, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sourcing issues 

message: Please refrain from POV pushing in the lead. Hardly anyone will doubt that Nairs were the primary practitioners of Kalari. To say that Ezhavas were the principal practitioners is plain BS. If any one disagrees with this, then post the proof. A simple Scholar search for Kalarippayattu+Nayar yields 187,000 & 165,000 (for Nair) results. Compare this with the 29 results for Kalarippayattu + Ezhava and 587 for Thiyya. If vandalism continues, admin intervention might be necessary. Chandrakantha.Mannadiar (talk) 19:16, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV pushing 

message: Adi murai had been linked to kalaripayattu and kalaripayattu has been later claasified into northern and southern adding that adi murai is the souther kalaripayattu.
The references cited only mentions about adi murai and its detail. These changes should be reverted back to its original.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vineet Nayar1 (talk • contribs) 07:50, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adi Murai should not be linked to kalaripayattu since it is a different form of martial art. 

message: As a non-practitioner of, & previously ignorant to, this subject; I find it extremely hard to help fix the references.
I have what I believe is the necessary knowledge of WP-Markup to complete it, but there are two major problems with the current article's external references:
# There appears to a multitude of ref's to Zarilli 1992 & Zarilli 1998. I believe the former is meant to ref' "To heal and/or to Harm, which is readily available (on the www) @ Exeter Uni's site which is already in the recommended reading section.
# The ref's to the latter (of the above) don't appear to point anywhere, as I am struggling to find what exactly Zarilli wrote in '98. Bit of help, please?
I am readily available to take constructive criticism and any comments _> MonstaPro:Talk:Contrib. 13:23, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have just finished cleaning the ref's, still with no idea as to what exactly "Zarilli 1998" or indeed "Luijendijk 2005" is supposed to direct to. When this is decided I suggest using the same format as that used on ref#2, complete with a URL!_> MonstaPro:Talk:Contrib. 13:53, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In addition, in the course of the cleanup I found that this reference was broken; it is now fixed & as a result the word-count of the Eytmology paragraph has increased. I hope this does not cause problems! _> MonstaPro:Talk:Contrib. 13:53, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Issues with references

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Kalaripayattu. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070628182657/http://www.phillipzarrilli.com/downloads/actualizing_power.pdf to http://www.phillipzarrilli.com/downloads/actualizing_power.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:12, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 21:36, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/312156130 V4vijayakumar (talk) 23:03, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why my contribution was removed? 

message: I've removed the citations from M. K. Agarwal and François Gautier as they don't look like reliable sources for history and engage in hyperdiffusionism and depict an unchanging ethnographic present. Agarwal's source, as with most or all of his other books, is self-published, and show definite fringe/pseudohistorical leanings. Gautier doesn't look so much fringe as simply not being rigorous history - his claim of Boddidharma teaching martial arts is well known as a 20th century creation, combining parts of serialized novels and folklore that had originally involved other figures. The notion that there is a fresco with the inscription Tenjiku Naranokaku, besides being unique to Gautier, is also rather silly: Tenjiku Naranokaku is Japanese, not Chinese, so we're apparently to assume that Chinese monks wrote in Japanese, or that Gautier and his editors don't know the difference, in which case they're clearly not reliable on the subject. His description of Boddidharma as "Father and founder of Zen Buddhism (called C'han <sic> in China)" similarly confuses the languages and the relationship between the schools - Zen is a development from Chan/Chán, and didn't appear until several centuries later. The history of Okinawan/Japanese martial arts is also garbled: jiujitsu was not developed from karate. Ergative rlt (talk) 19:12, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources in Lede 

message: I edited on list of Kalarippayattu sangam but it was removed Aaquibmkk (talk) 22:25, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi , it seems like the entire section containing the list was removed in a subsequent edit. Please feel free to restore your addition if you can appropriately incorporate it back into the article.– Aranya (talk) 17:38, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Kalaripayattu centres in kerala 

message: , ,   Just removed a linked redirected page Aromal Chekavar from infobox as there seems some attempts from anonymous IP's to replace the contents with Thacholi Othenan who was also a famous practitioner of the same martial art. Both the pages are alredy redirected to the article Vadakkan Pattukal as of some edit disputes. I think it is fair to not include disputed articles linked on to the infobox to look the main article unbiased for readers. Outlander07 10:53, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of redirected page from infobox 

message: Hi
Have somme arguments related to madhya kerala style ,
So before making an arbitrary edit i thought of discussing with all and lets together agree up on things that are going to be added or removed .
I would like to pint here that 
-> There is no such thing as Madhya Kerala, we cannot find those in ancient scripts or in history 
-> They even the promoters of madhya kerala like alex chacko , are saying that the name is creaed for promoting this by conducting competitions , the real name is kalam chavittu , as you might have seen from many facebook posts and comments.
-> Kalam chavittu was introduced by attar bapu , a native of ponani malapuram who travelled to tamil nadu and even to sri lanka , these kalam chavittu is exactly same as angam pore of sri lanka , despite some minor changes
-> Kalam chavittu cannot be considered as a authenthic kalari and it is fro ponani and kondotty taluks of malapuram , which not under madhya kerala , the name itself is wrong .
-> introducing a new art from srilanka and mixing with some techniques of northern or southern doesn't make an authentic ancient style of kalaripayattu.
-> Kerala Kalaripayattu association did not recognized this for the competition citing it is not kalaripayattu 
These are the points i would like to put forward.
I would like to point you that there exists many other authentic forms in akalripayattu which is not written down anywhere , so difficult give references .
Kadathanadan Kadhina Yoga is one such.
You cannot find any source other than a youtube video.
So as a authentic page like wikipedia , where millions of people are visiting daily, it is better that we keep only unambiguous and authentic orginal ancient stlyes in page , so that it would help the tourists and other martial arts lovers to pick up the real things easily.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kalari Poothara (talk • contribs) 11:49, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read WP:OR; whatever you say it require evidence from reliable sources (WP:CS), then only Wikipedia will accept it. This book do cites the existence of a madhya kalari as per Kerala Kalaripayattu Academy (KKA). I don't know much about Kalaripayattu, but just pointing that I found something. 2409:4073:1A:1213:4579:95EF:10C5:F4AB (talk) 13:00, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

text: You make allegations without validating it with evidences. You have cognitive bias, which is evident from your comment. Philip Zarelli is also a foreign author, indigenous gurukkals are also private tutors and have more vested interests than academic researchers. Talk page is not an online forum for posting your opinion, it has zero value. Bring sources for your claims. BTW, the statement about relation with Hinduism is unsourced. 2409:4073:2009:D208:64D6:5A5E:2252:ED08 (talk) 07:59, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Madhya Kerala Style  

message: Adding many weak references does not support a claim, if it's a strong source then one reference suffice. Several of the sources are WP:PRIMARY, which directly cites Kalaripayattu institutes or travel and tourism websites. Sources are cherry-picked to support a POV – when there are diverse claims and hypothesis, choosing a particular one and shopping references for it; an example is promoting only Parashurama legend, and the entire paragraph about southern style promotes only a single version (not to mention it uses a fake reference that cites nothing). While some content are left unsourced, for others verification partly fails, in other words, WP:OR is mixed with cited text. If this is the case for accessible sources then I doubt the verifiability of inaccessible books cited here. There is also a tendency for MOS:PUFFERY (like ). I have tagged the article. It requires cleanup and tags should be removed after that. 157.44.216.33 (talk) 08:10, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poor sourcing, misinterpreting citations, and neutrality issues 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:07, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: QUOTE: 'Kalaripayattu underwent a period of decline when the Nair warriors lost to the British after the introduction of firearms and especially after the full establishment of British colonial rule in the 19th century.[2] The British eventually banned kalaripayattu and the Nair custom of holding swords so as to prevent rebellion and anti-colonial sentiments. During this time, many Indian martial arts had to be practiced in secret and were often confined to rural areas.'
I do not know from where this type of writing comes. It is either perfect imagination or some other issue. I do not know whether Kalari belongs to any caste as such. I belong to a Thiyya family from Tellicherry. I understand that many of my family members of the British period of rule did attend Kalari. There was no ban imposed by British rulers in Tellichery. That is my understanding. Moreover, Kalari was, even though a very good martial arts, was not a weapon of war against that British. Beyond all this, there was not much of an anti-British feeling in Tellichery area, or in Malabar as such, other than among a few persons and groups.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.204.95.236 (talk) 03:32, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: That's your ignorance. "This type of writing" comes from documented historical evidences. Anyone who has read Kerala history will come across the fact that Nairs were the martial class, who were the army and police of the kingdoms, there were also other Hindu castes and Christians and Muslims, but was minority compared to the Nair force. It's in almost every history books mentioning old Kerala and in the accounts of Europeans and other foreigners. Kalari certainly was associated with the Nair caste, as it was described as a "martial art of nairs" in Indian and foreign documentations. 117.230.184.180 (talk) 16:36, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Something wrong 

message: To add in lead: "Kalaripayattu was predominantly practiced by the Nair community." Source: .
 117.230.41.114 (talk) 16:09, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The sources presented are not reliable and the claim is contradicted by reliable sources already in the lead. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:37, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 January 2021 

message: please include chenganuradi style within the sub style practiced regionally as it is practiced regionally in regions around  chengannur mainly in a place called mannar of alappuzha 2409:4073:4E0F:5DDA:1095:B3B8:8DBA:D5DE (talk) 16:42, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 17:52, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 February 2021 

message: Please remove 'Kalarippayattu stick fighting' in 'See also'. It only redirects back to this article. Or give me the allowness to can do it. Thanks. --Albrecht Eckert (talk) 02:44, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  'See also' 

message: It is stupid to categorise Tamil Martial Arts like Adi Murai(Marma adi&etc),silambam and etc as Southern style of Kallaripayat.I would like to stress that Kalaripayat and Various other Tamil Martial arts are different in terms of everything.Kalaripayat itself is formed just around 13th century while those other Tamil Martial arts that is claimed by baseless parties as a part of Kalaripayat is formed centuries earlier which were mentioned in Tamil literature of Sangam Age.This article needs a serious rewrite which must only include information about Kalaripayat and not other martial arts.--Rajendra Prasath Arumon 07:06, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorret Information 

message: I think its high time the "Modern Practice" section was expanded. I went ahead and expanded the "Notable Practitioners" section after receiving a suggestion from an IP editor on my talk page. My additions are all sourced with reliable sources too. If anyone has any additions or suggestions for that section, I'd like to hear them. I'd also like to talk about removing the additional citations tag on the page. There aren't many places in the article that require sources, and the ones that do have a citation needed template on them, but I don't think there are enough areas in the page that require citations that the full page needs to be flagged as such. If no one has any objections to removing it, I'll remove it one week from now. If anyone has any concerns or objections to that, please let me know here. Kalariwarrior (talk) 15:33, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion of Modern Practice section, opinions on new additions to Notable Practitioners section, and removal of additional citations tag on page. 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:12, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: So I recently expanded the Medieval history section, but reading through the Modern history section, I realize that a large portion of it is written about the 18th and 19th century. I think it may be a good idea to make that into two sections. Maybe call it "18th and 19th centuries" or "Early Modern History," or something like that. After this, anything that occurred in the 21st century (eg. Sri Meenakshi Amma's winning of the Padma Shri) can be left under "Modern Practuce." Its just an idea, but I wanted to see if anyone had any objections or suggestions if such a change was made. As always, I'll wait 1 week for any responses before potentially implementing this change. Kalariwarrior (talk) 00:30, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Division of "Modern Practice" section? 

message: :
 The Hindu is not a WP:HISTRS. P. Zarrilli says "" Wareon (talk) 17:33, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Apologies for the late reply. I've been rather busy. I see your point. While I consider Zarrilli to be more of a martial artist than a historian, his work is reliable. I admit I'm a bit reluctant to use him as a source, as he's already been used extensively on this page, but I suppose one more time couldn't hurt. I've edited the article to reflect Zarilli's work. Let me know what you think. Kalariwarrior (talk) 16:32, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Mentioning date on lead is WP:UNDUE. I have removed it from lead. Wareon (talk) 18:00, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

text: Date is undue for the lead because this form of martial art was not created in a specific century but it has origins from the ancient Sangam period. Its all in section. Wareon (talk) 16:56, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Dating

message: I don't why we need to change the name of something in order to look anglicized. The actual name is Kalaripayatt , and not Kalaripayattu.
Also Government of kerala has already passed a bill in kerala assembly to change the name of the state in english from kerala to keralam, realizing the msitake. This anglicization is observed commonly from people of kerala.
Just wondering do we need to change the name of a martial art to look anglicized or keep it as intact , for example name of kung-fu or karate is as it is and they never changes in english to look anglicized.
If agreed, we can change the name of the article to Kalaripayatt.
Afv12e (talk) Afv12e (talk) 22:11, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for bringing up your concerns about the name of the page! As far as I’m aware, most of the source material (even those written by Kalari gurukkals), all of which fall under WP:RELIABLE, all refer to it as Kalaripayattu. This issue falls under WP:COMMONNAME, which states that the most well known and commonly English used name should be used as the main name of the article, as this is the English Wikipedia. As such, according to Wikipedia policy, the article must continue to be known as, “Kalaripayattu.”  Kalariwarrior (talk) 03:19, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name : Kalaripayattu or Kalaripayatt ? 

message: hi, there is a legend regarding sabarimala Ayyappan learning kalari it's very important can you briefly add it ? It's mentioned in the article sabarimala Ayyappan ?? Wannabesomething123 (talk) 09:51, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: bilgil ,Joshua, kalariwarrior If you are adding legendary people like aromal chekavar why are not you adding Ayyappan ? Ayyappan also practiced kalari just like they did , why no Ayyappan ? Wannabesomething123 (talk) 10:20, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: https://englisharchives.mathrubhumi.com/travel/pilgrimage/chirakkadavu-where-lord-ayyappa-learnt-his-first-lesson-in-kalari-1.4314794 see this Ayyappan is very important to kalari he is mentioned as a kalari warrior too Wannabesomething123 (talk) 10:22, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, I did add some popular legend to the legend section , with citation and from the main article created , please review my work , Thanks . Wannabesomething123 (talk) 10:52, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: well its mentioned in the page and that source , i think it can be added , if clearly mention it as either  'legend' or 'mythology'. Bilgiljilll (talk) 11:13, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sabarimala and Ayyappan