“Of Rizal and Of Nationalism…

from different Perspective”

Source: Tabotabo, C.V. Corpuz, R.M.& Gavilino, J.C.(2019).Jose P. Rizal: Readings On

Heroism. Quezon City: Pan Asia Book Exchange , Incorporation

Reading One. Rizal from the Perspective of Sen. Claro M. Recto

 After the fierce battles to gain approval, the Rizal bill finally becomes a law.
Two years after its passage in the National Writers’ Conference in Baguio City the
law’s author outlined once again his ideals of a hero in the person of Rizal and the
latter’s fictive works.
Rizal’s love of his country made him very careful and wary in his moves and
decisions against the conquerors. He knew the capabilities of his people and the
might of Spain that fighting the conquerors by force was a form of suicide. The
situation radiates to the decision of America’s black novelist Richard Wright when
asked to participate in the communist movement of his country. He said I like their
passion to fight, the heat inside that pushed them, but I feel I am not confident of
the depth of their understanding about the cause they are fighting for. What we had
at the time were fighting farmers without background on armies and training in
warfare. They were peace – loving ordinary peasants and farmers driven to fight by
the hardships they encountered every day.
Rizal was careful, he saw what it would be to leave his people under the
leadership of a man who like the farmers possessed nothing but his own pure
idealism. Bonifacio had nothing in his mind and heart than to free the country from
the Spaniards by any means. But a Spanish free country was only a pure idea as
there was no concrete goal to achieve it. Owing to this observation Sen. Recto
described these two great Filipinos by calling each as idealist and realist .
Bonifacio is the idealist while Rizal the realist. Such descriptions are in a polar
opposite to what people commonly perceived as Bonifacio the realist while Rizal
should be the idealist, that Rizal should be the thinking man while Bonifacio the
acting. But the Senator justified his points.
Rizal was the realist while Bonifacio the idealist. How a man who is used to
thinking and reflecting could be labeled realist while the man of action is called the
idealist. Rizal never put anything into action without a possible victory. He based
his decisions on facts and he never drive into some conclusions without
considering the possible outcome of such an action. He knew very well the
capacity of the Filipinos against the Spaniards; to fight the Europeans was indeed a
form of suicide. He plans before he executes anything, so he was a realist. He
looks at the prevailing reality.
Now what of Bonifacio? He was a good man, a good Filipino who too can
inspire the modern - day Filipinos. But to compare him to Rizal on matter of
attitudes and orientation toward achieving Philippine independence, he indeed was
an idealist. First, he always wanted total autonomy of the country from Spain. He
had his aspiration while other Filipinos like Rizal and other propagandists
clamored to recognize the country as genuine part of Spain. Second, he was aware
of the plight of his people against the well - armed Spaniards. It was bolo against
cannons, bamboo made arrows and spear against the bursting cannon balls. He was
aware it was a form of suicide, yet he went on with the desire burning inside him to
fight and nothing else but to fight.
Rizal did not support the revolution; he proposed instead a peaceful resolution.
To achieve such goals, he proposed education as the true and genuine vanguard of
a nation. This aspiration was demonstrated in the life of the hero and in the fiction
he produced.
Sen. Recto identified the characters of the Noli and Fili who carried the
aspirations of Rizal. The hero wanted the Filipinos to be educated; he put up a
school in Dapitan. In the Noli he is Ibarra, a man of refinement and culture who
did all his best to put up a school. Isagani, Padre Florentino and among all others
all clamored for a peaceful resolution to the colonial problems of the Filipinos.
Sen. Recto declared that it is true that the novels of Rizal have characters like
Cabesang Tales and Capitang Pablo who are robbers. Yet the senator said these
characters are not at all war mongering at the start. The cruel and tenacious
circumstance of their lives forced them to bear arms against the oppressors.
At the end of the novels, peace suppressed cruelty. Padre Florentino threw away
the box of treasures and cried “for a greater purpose may the vowel of the sea
vomits you out.” The conquering power of the pen and not the sword overpower
everything. Sen. Recto quoted Rizal saying the resolution of the Filipinos was
baseless and resulted to nothing; it was beyond the hero’s knowledge; it was a
disgrace to the people and dismay to those people who wanted to help the
Filipinos.
It is the liberal ideas of the people that a country can stand from its own fall.
The senator saw Rizal and his works as framework in educating the Filipinos
toward attaining this liberal idea. The novels of Rizal described the harsh human
condition when a race is grappled by a foreign power. But the novels are clear such
a harsh life did not readily spring from the brutality of the conquerors. There is in
the people that made the race so prone and weak to the human predators. Rizal
called it “social cancer”; in our time we call it ignorance. Arcilla (1992) the novels
Rizal were not written solely for the Spaniards. It was also meant for the Filipinos.
Arcilla (1992) said the novel of Rizal particularly the Noli was not simply a work
that condemns the evil of the Spaniards; it was a novel that gives commentaries on
attitudes of the Filipinos which Rizal called the cancer.
Senator Recto went beyond suggesting it. He authored a bill that turned out into
a law after the tedious legislation. It is now an Act that requires the readings of the
two novels of Rizal repeatedly mentioned ahead.

Reading Two. Rizal from the Perspective of Sen. Jose P. Laurel

Sen. Jose P. Laurel had reasons for sponsoring the Rizal Law. Few paragraphs
later we have what he said. Right here it is worthy to remember and a necessary
information to know what Rizal had spoken so much about the youth and he
implored their significance to nation building.
It is the youth then other Filipinos. As of this writing according to
(HTTPS://GOV.PH/) the Philippines has a student population of 377,025
distributed in the 4,258 colleges and universities scattered around the archipelago.
In few years - time these students shall be the country’s entrepreneurs, politicians,
teachers, engineers and so on to all the various professions the country has.
But a great percentage of these future graduates will leave the country to work
for the rich in the countries where great grandchildren of those who came to the
Philippines as masters and oppressors are now living. The situation raises a
question if something has changed after a century of the master - servant relation.
 But at any rate, Rizal did not clamor for a total autonomy of the Philippines
from Spain. He even said there is enough room for every one in the Philippines. He
only asked for two conditions. The first is to educate the Filipinos. Second is to
reform the abusive Spanish government.
The reason why Rizal wanted the Filipinos to be educated before they can work
with others is clear. It is to stop the master – servant relation. He implied that other
people can work in the Philippines as partner and no longer on the master –
servant. The preposition used is “with” and not “for”. Unfortunately, to work
“with” others is impossible if these two others are not in balance between their
education. Imbalance in education will always result to subjugation where one of
the others will work as servant while the other will do the managing and eventually
maligning. In business there is no other aspiration than to maximize income which
should be achieved by any means maligning or not.
More than hundred years since Rizal lauded his aspirations for his country
almost every Filipino is now educated. It is seen on the number of schools offering
basic and higher education around the country. The Filipinos now work and paid
according to agreement that is between employer and employee. What is important
more now is that almost every Filipinos desire for a quality education. They have
found education the answer to their personal needs particularly financial.
They are educated, but the kind of education they received is still to be
determined if it hits the desire of Rizal. There is an education that does not end in
financial fulfillment. Those politicians convicted of plunder and corruption
bragged to be graduates from prestigious schools of the country. There is an
education that holds the service to the country a priority, a kind that produces
women like Spartan mothers who as described by Rizal shed no tears when
informed that their sons died in defense of the country.
Rizal dreamed that every Filipino will find beauty and discover self fulfillment
in his or her service for the country. It is the ideal he died for and the Rizal Law
asks everyone to look after him as model.
Former Sen. Laurel supported the move in the legislative branch to ratify the
proposal to make the course Rizal a requirement in the college education. He
argued that Rizal was the forerunner in the action to carve the Filipino nationalism.
The independence achieved by the country and its eventual nationhood was owed
to him. It is just inevitable for the citizens of this country particularly the young to
absorb the principles that brought the hero to Bagumbayan in the morning of
December 30, 1896.

Reading Three. Rizal from the Perspective of Fr. Horacio de la Costa S. J.

Few years before the Rizal Law was approved Bishop Rufino J. Santos, D.D.
Archbishop of Manila sent a pastoral letter representing the stand of the church
toward the proposal of making the reading of Rizal’s novels a requirement in
college. A bishop’s letter was then drafted and among the names with part in
drafting the pastoral letter came out Fr. Horacio de la Costa S.J. He was a Filipino
Jesuit, a historian and a former dean of Ateneo de manila’s College of Arts. He
was a scholar and a literary figure.
According to Schumacher (2011) it appears that de la Costa was asked by the
bishop to draft the pastoral letter. Several drafts were made and some changes were
made. But de la Costa was still believed to be the major author of the pastoral
letter.
The Jesuit priest maintained that the national hero was a man of outstanding
moral character with a strong adherence to truth. His works specifically the novels
that speak of truth shall become the foundation of the political and societal
standard of the Filipino people.
Based on the outlooks of Rizal as perceived by de la Costa, and if the Filipino
really like to build up a nation, then making Rizal and his works as blueprint is
inevitable. He was morally upright, and he was devoted to the truth. No race can
settle into a nation without those characteristics of its people. So long as the
Filipinos aspire for nationhood, so long as they continue to dream of cultural
autonomy, they need Rizal and his works.
 On the contrary signs of losing cultural autonomy and failing effort to obtain a
nation of their own are seen on the people’s disregard to the ideals implanted on
them in the past. Leaders show a continued dependence on other countries, the
people’s disrespect to culture and their blatant defiance to orders represented by
laws, are clear signs of moral depravity. What will happen next are crumbled
people dependent on the crumbs the rich can toss into them.
Nation building is attained to by first, strengthening self - pride, then, imposing
nationalism. It is the path to a genuine independence, and independence is the most
important fiber of a nation. Again, from the same source according to de la Costa,
Rizal devoted himself to educating the people as the only means to safeguard them
from any form of tyranny and dominion in the future. Rizal also worked hard to lift
up the ethical standard of the Filipinos; he wanted the Filipinos to fight back
against injustices imputed unto them by the foreign power of Spain.
When Senator Recto introduced the Rizal Law in 1956 the controversies of the
bishop’s statement became apparent. De la Costa, the said drafter of the pastoral
letter was not in the Philippines when the law was debated and the said pastoral
was even available ahead of 1956.
The pastoral letter explained about the mandatory reading of the said novels in
both private and public schools. The first draft which was solely written Fr. De la
Costa glorifies the national hero and his novels. But tone changed in the following
drafts when an interlocutor believed to be Fr. Jesus Cavanna surfaced. It then
contains some claims that Rizal through the actions and voices of his characters he
attacked the church.
At the end a unified conclusion was reached. Schumacher (2011) it was
declared that the novels were found no serious dangers to faith and morals of the
Catholic. It further says that it conforms to the teaching of the gospels and right
reason. It was only recommended the novels shall not be given to the young
readers without strict guidance of important adults particularly teachers. Important
recommendation was further highlighted, to come up with annotated text of the
novels. Annotation will explain the contents of the novels that involved the
Catholic faith. Its basic purpose is to guide the readers particularly the young who
have no trainings in reading historical fiction and besides young readers are prone
to immediate acceptance of what is on print.