04/11/2025
♦♦ Kalaripayattu Needs to Standardize and Brand Each of Its Teaching Lineages and Structures Without Losing Its Soul ♦♦
P A Muhammad Riyas, Saji Cherian, V Abdurahiman
◘ Introduction: The Present Challenge
Kalaripayattu, often hailed as the mother of all martial arts, stands as one of India’s most ancient and culturally profound traditions. Yet, despite its historic depth and spiritual roots, the art today faces a structural challenge — the absence of a standardized and recognized framework that identifies and validates each lineage and its method of study.
Across Kerala and beyond, the methods of teaching Kalaripayattu vary widely depending on the region, lineage (parampara), or Gurukkal. Each Kalari has developed its own interpretation of training stages, Meypayattu sequences, and weapon progression. This diversity reflects the richness of Kerala’s cultural evolution, but it also creates confusion and inconsistency for new learners, especially those coming from outside the state or from abroad.
Students often find that what they learn in one Kalari may differ significantly from another — not only in style, but in sequence, technique, and terminology. This lack of an organized framework and branding for each lineage affects the art’s educational clarity, global recognition, and professional development. Moreover, in the absence of an officially recognized certification or accreditation process, it becomes difficult to assess a practitioner’s level or ensure consistent instructional standards.
In short, while Kalaripayattu retains its spiritual essence and traditional diversity, it struggles with academic and institutional clarity. To ensure its sustainable growth and international recognition, there is an urgent need to review, document, standardize, and brand each recognized lineage and teaching method — not to merge them into one, but to highlight and preserve each as part of a well-defined heritage.
♦ Lessons from Other Martial Arts: The Journey Toward Standardization
Kalaripayattu’s current situation — rich in diversity but lacking structured recognition — is not unique. Most ancient martial arts across the world faced similar challenges in their early stages. Their growth into modern, globally recognized disciplines came through developing frameworks that standardized teaching quality while preserving traditional schools and lineages.
1. Karate (Japan)
In its early days, Karate in Okinawa and Japan had multiple schools such as Shotokan, Goju-Ryu, Sh*to-Ryu, and Wado-Ryu, each with its own philosophy, techniques, and teaching order. As Karate spread beyond Japan, the need for structured teaching and recognition became clear. Organizations like the Japan Karate Association (JKA) and the World Karate Federation (WKF) developed standardized guidelines, grading systems, and certification processes. Today, a “black belt” earned anywhere represents a consistent level of training and understanding, even though each Karate school still maintains its unique identity and syllabus.
2. Kung Fu / Wushu (China)
China’s martial traditions were once as varied as Kalaripayattu, with hundreds of regional and temple-based styles such as Shaolin, Wing Chun, Hung Gar, and Baguazhang. To preserve and promote these arts, the Chinese government introduced Modern Wushu in 1949 — a standardized framework for grading, demonstration, and competition. Traditional Kung Fu systems continued to thrive independently, but the national framework provided structure, visibility, and academic recognition to Chinese martial heritage as a whole.
3. Taekwondo (Korea)
Before the 1950s, Korea had several martial practices such as Hwa Rang Do and Tang Soo Do. Recognizing the need for global growth, the Korean government brought them together under the Kukkiwon (World Taekwondo Headquarters). Kukkiwon established a common format for grading, certification, and presentation while still acknowledging the philosophical roots of each system. This structured recognition helped Taekwondo achieve Olympic status and worldwide respect.
♦ Common Outcome
In all these examples, diversity remained intact, but educational frameworks brought clarity, recognition, and academic structure. This balance between tradition and organization is the key to their success — and it offers valuable guidance for Kalaripayattu’s future.
♦ The Way Forward: Building a Framework for Recognition and Standardization
Kalaripayattu’s immense diversity is its greatest strength, yet also its biggest challenge. Each Gurukkal and Kalari lineage has evolved its own distinct structure, Meypayattu series, and teaching philosophy over generations. Many have documented their systems through books and research, and most practitioners are aware of the major regional traditions such as Vadakkan, Thekkan, Madhya Kerala, and Thulunad.
However, despite this vast knowledge base, there is no coordinated structure, review process, or branding that connects these lineages within a recognizable educational system. Each style remains identified mainly by its Gurukkal or Kalari, rather than by a recognized lineage name or standardized reference structure. This creates difficulties for students, researchers, and international enthusiasts trying to understand Kalaripayattu’s internal landscape.
1. The Need for Dialogue, Not Uniformity
The aim is not to unify or merge all syllabi into a single pattern. That would contradict Kalaripayattu’s spirit of parampara — the sacred continuity of individualized teaching traditions. Instead, the need is to encourage dialogue and review among Gurukkals and scholars to identify, document, and officially recognize the existing diversity.
2. A Federated and Inclusive Framework
Through these discussions, Kalaripayattu can gradually evolve into a federated model of standardization — one that respects each lineage’s independence while providing a common educational reference. Within this structure, each style will retain its own unique techniques, philosophy, and traditions. This is not one syllabus for all, but a shared framework that allows Kalaripayattu to be understood and respected as an organized system while protecting its lineage-based identity.
3. Encouraging Interstyle Dialogue and Collaboration
One major challenge today is the lack of interstyle dialogue. Most lineages work in isolation, rarely engaging beyond performances or competitions. Establishing interstyle seminars, workshops, and annual Gurukkal councils can build trust, encourage comparative learning, and lay the groundwork for voluntary consensus on recognition and academic development.
4. A Call to Initiate Review and Documentation
The goal is not to impose, but to initiate systematic review and documentation of every recognized lineage. Through open discussion among Gurukkals, cultural institutions, and universities, Kalaripayattu can preserve its spiritual integrity, improve academic visibility, and strengthen its global identity as India’s indigenous martial art. Standardization should grow through collaboration, not enforcement, ensuring every lineage is acknowledged, documented, and promoted.
♦ The Role of the Kerala Government: Coordinating the Path Forward
Over the years, many individuals and organizations have tried to create common platforms for Kalaripayattu, but most efforts have failed due to the absence of a neutral coordinating authority. Each Gurukkal rightly protects their lineage, but that same independence makes self-organization difficult.
In the modern context, where martial arts are academically structured and globally marketed, Kalaripayattu requires a facilitator strong enough to coordinate without controlling. The Government of Kerala, through its Departments of Culture, Sports, and Tourism, is best positioned to play this role.
◘The government can:
- Form a Kalaripayattu Coordination Council with representatives from all major lineages, cultural experts, and officials.
- Act as a neutral moderator for syllabus review and recognition.
- Support documentation and digital archiving of each lineage.
- Provide funding, academic validation, and tourism integration.
- Encourage university-level programs offering recognition of diverse Kalaripayattu traditions.
♣ Footnote
Kalaripayattu does not need unification — it needs recognition and coordination. Each Gurukkal and lineage carries a part of its living soul, and the future lies in documenting, reviewing, and branding each of these traditions under a common platform.
It is the responsibility of the Kerala Government to bring Gurukkals together, facilitate dialogue, and guide the creation of a framework that respects and promotes every lineage.
If such a sincere, government-supported effort takes place, Kalaripayattu can finally overcome confusion and fragmentation, presenting itself to the world as a structured, respected, and globally celebrated martial tradition — one that modernizes its teaching system without losing its soul.
Team Ankam - R&D
