|
(The following is an excerpt from the
essay,
"Rizal, the Armed Rebel", by Antonio M. Alonzo, 1999,
click to download, MSWORD version 8 to view)
It has now become fashionable for anyone, to
show-off their knowledge of Philippine history as non-conventional by declaring the
Philippine National Hero as a PACIFIST or REFORMER. This then is immediately
followed by, "….the national hero should have been Andres
Bonifacio….".
Arguments like it was the Americans (2)
(William Howard Taft, the governor of the American Colonial government of the Philippines)
who selected him to be a national hero as the "SAFE" selection.
More, Rizal's own sentiments (1) (as
accused by an American writer)show Rizal believed that only a reform from above is
feasible in the Philippines.
Other writings went even as far as
condemning Dr. Rizal for not joining the Katipunan (2)
thus shows total ignorance of the events leading to the Philippine revolution.
At the outset, it seems this
"radical" thought is truly from "enlightened" minds. But further
research shows Dr. Jose Rizal was truly, without a doubt the Philippine National
Hero. The reason for the revolution, the reason why our forefathers (and mothers)(4)
took up arms and risked their lives and the reason the Philippines won independence
from Spain.
But FACTS are:
Dr. Jose Rizal was NOT
AGAINST a Bloody revolution. He was
against an unprepared rebellion that may cost unnecessary lives. Although, being a learned
man, this road may seem remote from his usual petit bourgeois lifestyle, his only concern
was only for his fellow countrymen. This is much more so understood as he had relatives,
even his youngest sister Josefa and a sister in law and
his eldest brother, Paciano who eventually led the same rebels against the
Spaniards and the Americans, as members of the Katipunan.(4)
His concern was much more about the success of a Bloody revolution and quick expulsion of
the Spanish friars. He abhors needless sufferings by being unprepared and advised
Andres Bonifacio to buy ships and arms and gather more funds (sources of fundings came
from Dr. Rizal himself and this tactic was followed religiously by Bonifacio) before
plunging the whole country to rebellion. (3)
One must understand that Andres Bonifacio, the founder of the Katipunan, was a
member of Dr. Jose Rizal's "La Liga Filipina". And it was only when Dr.
Rizal was arrested that Bonifacio became dissolutioned and that he decided for himself
that truly peaceful means will not work and organized the Katipunan, the day after Dr.
Rizal's arrest for an armed resistance.
Bonifacio sought advice from Dr. Jose Rizal (3)
routinely and those that condemn Dr. Rizal for not "joining" the Katipunan
is really amiss at best.
It is worth nothing that the codes and
structure of Katipunan is patterned after Freemasonry. Bonifacio is not a mason,
much less had any idea of how this "secret" society is structured. Dr.
Jose Rizal is a Freemason and had been ex-communicated by the Friars for being so.
More, it is interesting that Dr. Jose Rizal's sentiments in his early writings are clearly
reflected in the Code of the Katipunan. It is hard to imagine that a man who would
devote so much time, effort and detail in his second novel, "El Filibusterismo",
the conceptualization, the feasibilty, the planning and the execution of Philippine
Revolution to be totally against it. And he skillfully lit the fire and fury in his
readers' heart by ending the novel with an ending that nobody wants. an ending , that
gives up! It is such a strong 'CALL FOR ACTION' that anybody who misses that is
missing a lot more than Dr. Rizal's desire of Freedom.
Just because Dr. Rizal was not a member of
the Katipunan does not necessarily mean he had nothing to do with it or influence in it
the least bit.
We must remember, that during the VERY FIRST
CELEBRATION of PHILIPPINE INDEPENDENCE DAY on June 12, 1899 at RITZ THEATER in BUSTILLOS,
SAMPALOC MANILA, all the Generals, and heroes who where still alive where all there
proclaiming Dr. Jose Rizal as the "NATIONAL HERO. Yes, it was years before the
Americans declared him as such.
It must be remembered that Rizal's founding
of the Liga Filipina was the prime catalyst for the mobilization of the Katipunan led by
Andres Bonifacio and other separatists (note that Mabini was present when Rizal initiated
the Liga). And Antonio Luna, the brilliant general of Aguinaldo's army of the first
Philippine Republic, was already in contact with Rizal in Europe when Rizal was an active
collaborator of Marcelo del Pilar and Graciano Lopez Jaena in La Solidaridad. First Luna
in 1884: "Assimilating his ideas, pondering his concepts that readily aroused
our enthusiasm, we found an echo, though timid, of his voice within ourselves."
And Mabini in 1899: "While we Filipinos living today do not individually
amount to as much as Rizal, yet we can join together to get the force necessary to the
realization of the work begun by him." I second Luna's multiplication of Rizal's
voice and Mabini's motion of unifying and mobilizing our forces for national-democratic
self-determination.* (*last paragraph from E. San Juan Jr., Rizal in Our Times, Anvil
Publications, 1997)
I challenge each and everyone of you to do a more thorough research on the
subject before condemning the greatest Malay that ever lived.
|
|
