I like the Silat thing in a general way. When I watch that I see our (same) applications all over it, and flow included. I do not see the shenfa or Jin much at all. It is a much more "external" (or local, non-networked) power arrangement, but at least in terms of a particular class of hand application there is much crossover. I think this kind of Silat is illustrating a class of applications that has been almost lost in Taijiquan, which is in the striking and long to medium range light touch leverage approach; sorry I have no good concise name for this, but it is a thing I understand.
Due to Taijiquan's own evolution it came to favor or prioritize grappling FIRST. This is close and heavy resistance, as that type of partner practice is most useful for developing and providing feedback to the foundational specifics of Taijiquan's structure and jin. At the developmental stages of Taijiquan practice (which lasts mostly forever

) we continue to want heavy feedback, and really to compel and incentivize growth in weight bearing, though legs as well as how the body holds opponents' weight and force through the limbs then trunk as connected to the legs, as well as to bear heavy force, without weight (more horizontal). More of this kind of feedback and growth incentive develops exactly how the foundation (base) networks with the trunk to produce the specific shenfa. Eventually this shenfa is then re-purposed to drive exactly the class of applications SIlat is showing here, yet on an entirely different engine and therefore a different pacing and effect.
In the Taijiquan path and paradigm these applications would be considered quite advanced, although in generally practical martial arts as well as something like Silat they are mostly just business as usual. Taijiquan takes the mundane and adds introspection, making simple things complex, or to put it more accurately, making the simple and normal energetically and physically deep and rich. In that sense the apparent path is reversed. Normal practical martial applications are seen as advanced while depth, shenfa and 'qi' are placed in the primary position. At the end of the path lies the normal, mundane, simple and effective practicalities, but by the time we arrive there we have much depth within these actions and methods. This of course is because such depth and intensity cannot be reverse engineered into it. The founders of this art realized this over many generations I guess. I myself after some decades and failed approaches and teaching challenges also realized this from confirming experience. There are plenty of self important dreamers in different martial arts out there who wold love to claim that after decades of practical simple martial arts they magically became 'internal' or whatever they want to call that, but observing, it takes less time than a shart to notice that is not the case. It's always just a cheap fantasy idea of connection. In my experience there is no way around the years of work.
The Silat above, I appreciate it. It is what I would casually call the fast "get in, get out" class of applications. Everything is done at a safe non-contact (sanshou) distance. Contact is essentially light and strategically placed to create a musculo-skeletal involuntary change/response such that not a lot of force (struggle) is needed. The flow is then harnessed to exploit the most of the changes and opportunities created. In Taijiquan this skill comes with years of Qin Na and Striking Drill practice. Qin Na develops the ability to manipulate limbs/joint at touch, because the patterns of force and leverage are established. Striking drill are a master then mix and match situation. One has to know them all or at least enough and well enough that they are natural. Then one must be able to mix them all in a flow without lacking in each. As far as the state of things in the general public Qin Na is most represented in our lineage, and striking is almost entirely lost to the art as a whole. "Get in, get out" here refers to the approach to strike and touch. It is again a somewhat light touch approach that operates at a safe distance, makes its mark and then breaks contact (gets out) always retracting to rechamber the weapon.
In comparison, the lack, or drawbacks of this approach are that it does not link or refer back to grappling. I am not saying this guy cannot grapple, he has the ideal body type for it for sure. I am saying this approach does not seamlessly link with it, specifically because of the get in, get out method. Taijiquan grappling is on the flow spectrum with joint lock and strike. It must be trained with the unbroken contact approach. No weapons are rechambered, no safe distance and no retraction. This of course is part of the reason for the specific shenfa, which to some degree was likely developed to negate the need for rechambering and 'getting out'.
Personally, while I appreciate the Silat approach above, it only makes me appreciate Taijiquan more, because it looks so similar, but it would be kind of empty and neurologically boring to me to go through these patterns without the depth and fullness. There is no going back once one has experienced that ocean of rich sensation. Of course to those who have not cultivated that (yet?) that can sound like a bunch of fantasy bullshit or worse, advertising hype, but it's very real and it is attainable.
In finality the above level of practice would be what some old timers called "third stage" or explosive practice which involved gather and release with explosive power all the way through. It is a practice of great extremes, hard and soft long and short, slow and fast, once the middle of all those and the connection has been fully built. While we appreciate illustrations and demonstratively practical fast arts as the above it is helpful to ask where it leads to, what does it lack, and what is gained by our approach. If nothing is gained it is best to move on to such a visibly available practical art, but this question is both about one's current choice of school/teacher/lineage as it is about one own hunger. If the faster gratification is what one hungers for, Silat as above would be a better bet. If the depth and connection is what one hungers for Silat and other similarly demonstrative practice styles won't get there, ever, even though it is very popular now (after Taijiquan's commercial popularity) to claim it does. It does not. Taijiquan put's this stuff at the end of the path, including and after a re-engineered body and connectivity on multiple levels. The stuff that puts this at the beginning of the path is exactly what it appears to be, only.