LESSON 18 Rizal and the Philippine Revolution of 1896 Lesson Outcomes: ‘Atthe end of the lesson, the students should be able to: 1. compare the concept of reform and revolution; 2, analyze Rizal's views regarding the Philippine Revolution of 1896; and 3. _ apply the concept of revolutionary spirit in present-day issues. Lesson Introduction: We often hear Rizal's classical opinion on Philippine Revolution that the “Filipinos were not yet teady for armed resistance against Spain in 1896”. Equall; popular was the primacy Rizal gave to education. Likewise, Rizal allegedly indulged in reforms only and rejected revolution for an independent Filipino nation. These views, unfortunately, are perpetually passed on to future generations. Today, we tend to make false dichotomies between the Ilustrado and Masses, vis-4-vis Reform vs Revolution. We even make our heroes clash like chickens in a cockpit arena when we compare Rizal's pen and Bonifacio’s bolo. 4 This lesson analyzes the concepts of reform and revolution to see if Rizal's views really contradicted the aspiration of the Philippine Revolution of 1896. Exploration: Rizal-Bonifacio Connection Rizal and Bonifacio had more connections th: however, make them quarrel. The point is, clash, dead as they are? They might have goal was the same—to establish a separati an differences. The Filipinos today, with a few heroes we have, why make them utilized different methods, but the ultimate e Filipino nation, : Instructions: Fon ve g find newspapers or h toryLesson 18: Rizal andthe Philippine Revolution of 1896. | 93 3 Lesson Discussion: Rizal’s Separatist Stance Historian Renato Constantino, ‘ in his 1969 Rizal Day lecture, read his seminal ticle tilled Vene eration without Understanding. His main thesis centered on the repudiation of Philippines’ national hero to the Revolution of 1896 led by Andres Bonifacio and participated in by the masses, as attested by Rizal’s December 15, 1896 manifesto to a certain Filipino and Pio Valenzuela’s prison testimony. Constantino even accused Rizal as an American-sponsored hero or a colonial hero who in spirit supported the prolongation of American Imperialism; and a limited hero who only advanced the interests of his fellow Ilustrados. Constantino went beyond boundaries by prescribing the nation to replace Rizal in the pantheon of heroes with a “true” hero, ‘who embodies the hopes and desires of the people. The critical tone Constantino popularized became etched in the minds of Filipinos for a long period of time. It actually became the standard critique on Rizal's heroism until recent works appeared conciliating the role of Rizal in the Philippine Revolution. Notable here was the work of Floro Quibuyen titled A Nation Aborted: Rizal, American Hegemony, and Philippine Nationalism. He vehemently accused Constantino and other writers who hastily and anachronistically studied Rizal. For Quibuyen, what was needed was careful reading of Rizal's correspondence, novels, essays, foundation of La Liga Filipina, and how Katipuneros and the Filipino masses in the 19th century perceived him. With this, itisnecessary to point outsome of the factors that led to the radicalization of Jose Rizal. As early as 1887-1888, Rizal had already been entertaining the possibility of a separate Filipino Nation. In a letter to his friend Ferdinand Blumentritt, he stated that: The Filipinos had long wished for Hispanization and they were wrong in aspiring for it. It is Spain and not the Philippines who ought to wish for the assimilation of the country. (Rizal’s Letter to Blumentritt on February 21, 1887) ‘The Calamba Hacienda Case, which was personally led by Rizal during his brief detour in the Philippines in 1887 and the events that followed it greatly influenced his brewing separatist stance. The event on March 1, 1888, now knownas the Manifestation of 1888, or what Historian Austin Coates considered “the first public outcome of the influence of Noli me Tangere” was the first to affect him. The incident involved the gobernadorcillos of Manila who appealed to the civil governor for the expulsion of friars in the Philippines. The petition was junked and as a response, those twenty- eight people who spearheaded the standoff were imprisoned. Rizal, upon learning this, wrote to his friend Blumentritt and expressed his emotions:94 | ‘ACourse Module for The Life, Works, and Wings of Jose Rizal the majority of Filipinos have already } ieve that it is already late; cee a eS oinaad we await our fate from God + pinned on Spain! Now, lost the hope they have pinned on ; and from ourselves, bitt never any more from any Government! (Rizal’s Letter to Blumentritt on June 23, 1888) arrests which spanned from late March to early April 1889 ntinuation of A i The contit In this arrest, Matias, also contributed to the transformation of Rizal’s consciousness. the brother of Rizal's friend Jose Maria Basa, was involved as he allegedly supported anti-friar propaganda. When he heard this, he wrote a letter to his colleague Mariano Ponce, and said that: Though we must regret this [wave of arrests] as a private misfortune, ‘we must applaud it as a general good... Let them commit abuses, let there be arrests, exile, executions, good! Let Destiny be fulfilled! The day on which they inflict martyrdom on our innocent families for our fault, farewell, pro- friar government and perhaps farewell, Spanish Government! (Rizal's Letter to Mariano Ponce on April 18, 1889) Lastly, of course, was when Rizal’s family was directly affected by Spanish persecution: 1) Manuel Hidalgo; his brother-in-law, was deported to Bohol; 2) their house in Calamba was demolished; .and 3) his parents and sisters were exiled in different parts of the archipelago.’ The pain caused by this event enabled him to immortalize and vindicate the people of Calamba in Chapter 10 of his second novel El Filibusterismo (Wealth and Misery): A year had passed, but he could not forget the gryesome memory of Calamiba evictions. All these made him realize that the best solution to combat the Spanish tyranny was to return to the Philippines. In a letter to Mariano Ponce, he said: Tam thinking of returning [to the Philippines] as soon as. possible, and let God say what is to happen...If one must die, let one die at least in his country, for his country and in the name of his county. (Rizal's Letter to Mariano Ponce on July 1890) Rizal and the Philippine Revolution of 1896 It has been pointed out earlier that Rizal indeed a: nation. His role in the Philippine Revolution of 1896 « One must realize that for Rizal, the ultimate goal was independence and the clamor for it manifested in many ways. Reform was one method, as clearly se ‘in his Proposed constitution of La Liga Filipina in 1892. For him, een ian F as not the end of it all. One might argue that Rizal was ambivalent, or in the a f Historian Teodoro Agoncillo, a “reluctant revolutionary.” He had reserve tu fi it might cost lives. What he had in mind was a clear method of chistes the goal spired for a separate Filipino ‘an now be easily understood.Lesson 18: Rizal and the Philippine Revolution of 1696 | 95 of independence, According, to Rizal, Filipinos should know the enlightenment of people, the development of a national sentiment, and a revolutionary spirit through liberty and education, Rizal was consistent in all of his writings after 1890 that the revolution must come from the “inside”—meaning that the revolution should not change people; but rather we needed change within ourselves and this must come first before staging a revolution. The Filipinos must become disciplined and follow ethical standards. A learned man as he was, reading books of past revolutions in the world, Rizal was hesitant to stage an armed revolution only to replace the old colonial masters with new sets of tyrants, Padre Florentino, a character of El Filibusterismo reflected the state of mind of Rizal when he said that “the slaves of today will be the tyrants of tomorrow.” After all, Rizal adhered to the idea of Social Darwinism—that any society will lead to freedom and emancipation after a long process of evolution. So, to him, why not wait for it if the goal could be achieved without bloodshed? The treasure chest beneath the sea floor explained it all. We shall now return to the two main evidence of Constantino’s attack on Rizal— Pio Valenzuela’s prison testimony in 1896 and the repudiation for revolution in Rizal's December 15, 1898 manifesto to certain Filipinos. The first was the opinion of Rizal about the Katipunan and the possible revolution. Pio Valenzuela was the one assigned to visit Rizal in Dapitan to tell him about the existence of a secret society, which was Jong preparing for a revolution since 1892. The classical reply of Rizal according to Valenzuela was that Rizal was not in favor of armed resistance: “No, no, no, a thousand times, no,” Rizal allegedly uttered. But Valenzuela had a change of heart because in his 1914 memoir, he modified his statement by telling that Rizal had actually supported the revolution only if his standards were met: 1) support from wealthy Filipinos; 2) induce Antonio Luna, an educated person in terms of western military strategy in the movement; and lastly 3) neutralize the unsympathetic to the cause of the secret society. Valenzuela also emphasized that Rizal advised him and the Katipunan to continue the revolution; and that when found out, they should Kill before the Spaniards kill them. When asked if there was disagreements among the high ranks of the Katipunan regarding the opinion of Rizal, Valenzuela pointed out that there was no divide and members all agreed to Rizal; therefore the clash between Rizal and Bonifacio, like what the present-day critics of Rizal created, was non-existent in the 19th century Philippines. Though one may argue the invalidity of the 1914 statement of Valenzuela because itwas said long after his encounter with Rizal in Dapitany one cannot deny the fact that his first statement about the rejection of Rizal to Katipunan may also be ee credible. Pio Valenzuela was under duress that time and his motive of cleaning ¢ e eae of Rizal was made in the context of Rizal's impending trial and Geen Neve e less whatever the true statement was, the Filipinos, especially tmedicnted il ipinns a another picture of Rizal in their minds. We will discuss this in the next part.96 | ACourse Module for The Life, Works, and Writings of Jose Rizal In regard to the open condemnation of Rizal to Philippine Revolution, according to historian Leon Ma, Guerrero, the statement of Rizal was never: believed by the Judge Advocate General, thus he refused to approve and iene it to People. Rizal's true purpose was to clear his name because he was then fighting for his life. Like a lawyer who was set to face trial, Rizal was attacking the credibility of his prosecutor, when he offered his manifesto. Therefore, it was normal then to deviate himself frow, the revolution which in the first place, the foundation was beyond his knowledge Below is the complaint of the Judge Advocate General on the manifesto of Rizal, »: quoted by Guerrero: [Rizal] limits himself to condemning the present rebellious movement as premature and because he considers its success impossible at this time, but Suggesting between the lines the independence dreamed of can be achieved by means less dishonorable than those used at present by the rebels when the [level of] culture of the people could serve as a most valuable factor in the struggle and as the guarantee of its success, For Rizal it is a question of opportunity, not of principles or objectives. His manifesto can be condensed into these words: ‘Faced with the proofs of defeat, lay down your arms, my countrymen; I shall lead you to the Promised Land ona later day’. [426-427] Rizal and the Revolutionist The other side of Rizal’ contribution to the Philippine Revolution should not be overlooked. Remember that most Filipinos had not read Rizal, for all his works were ad in fact generated a different meaning of Rizal's persona ey gathered or heard, According to historian Reynaldo C. seen ina very “un-Ilustrado” fe rallying cry, a battle chant 0 believe attles for the Filipinos wh ; din res: i id salvation. ‘urrection an