Rizal is not GOD (Re-imagined) PDF

Rizal is not GOD (re-imagined) by: Joey A. Lopez, Ph.D in Philippine Studies (cand.) UP-Diliman To understand Rizal, is to understand where he was coming from. To understand his philosophy, one must have a comprehensive overview of the 19th century colonial Philippines [1800-1899]. To understand hi...

Rizal is not GOD (re-imagined) by: Joey A. Lopez, Ph.D in Philippine Studies (cand.) UP-Diliman To understand Rizal, is to understand where he was coming from. To understand his philosophy, one must have a comprehensive overview of the 19th century colonial Philippines [1800-1899]. To understand him, is to understand the time, space, technology and element when he was born. What was the condition of the Philippines during the mid-19th century up to the latter part of the period? He was born on June 19, 1861 and was executed on December 30, 1896. It was a very short span of time. The framing of his mind has something to do with the political and social conditions of the time that obviously affected his writings. The liberal European influences of Rousseau and Voltaire were evident in his writings. He was greatly influenced by these philosophers, shaping more of his thoughts in understanding the complexities of his generation. Way back home, the colonial condition was oppressive. Suppression in the colony especially embracing the tenets of basic liberty was denied. The combining powers of the state and the church [frailocracy] defined the lives of the Filipinos. The basic social and cultural life revolves within the church. An attack to anyone of these entities is tantamount to deportation, banishment and even execution. Liberal ideas were considered as dangerous. Rizal's unique way of theorizing liberalism in a colonial atmosphere paved a way to his nationalism. His nationalist thoughts were the result of his liberal suffering (Claudio, 2019). Just like to understand the author or a writer whether in books, broadsheets or blogs, one must check the background of the author from education, work, affiliation, family, [time and element when the book was written]. Why he was writing, for whom he was writing? What was the framing of his mind while he was writing and the underlying propaganda? Was he independent or financed by someone or a paid trumpheter to muddle the issue inorder to confuse the other? Rizal was a victim of oppressive colonial rules. He was assaulted by a guardia civil (some were barbers and farmers way back in Spain) when he was 17 years old on his way home for not recognizing an authority in a dark street. His aging mother was imprisoned (alleged poisoning) for two and a half years without due process (sounds familiar). During the arrest, Dona Teodora was forced to walk from Calamba to Santa Cruz for 50 kms. This was very painful to Rizal, especially when he heard that she had gotten sick due to maltreatment inside the prison cell until the Manila Audencia acquitted her. His narratives were a product of suffering. Rizal’s family was persecuted and subjected to harsh attacks of the Spaniards. Pro- Spanish writers even maligned him by writing derogatory articles inorder to discredit his writings. His brother in-law Manuel T. Hidalgo was exiled and banished in Bohol. He left with four kids without due process. Saturnina, in turn, singlehandedly raised her four kids. Rizal was helpless in Europe, penniless and caught with TB while writing the Noli. He sought refuge in open parks while inhaling the aroma of a nearby restaurant. In reality, his two novels that were translated in multiple languages all over the globe did not make money. These two novels were even the causes he paid dearly with his life. A polyglot, who speaks 22 languages, and can read hieroglyphics (Egyptian writings). Rizal studied theology and religion and even challenging religious debates with Fr. Pablo Pastells, SJ in Dapitan. Rizal have engaged in polemics with the best German scholars whether in religion or in sciences in Europe. He even considered Germany as his laboratory school. His intelligence is paramount to that of Shakespeare. He was a practicing catholic even when he was exiled in Dapitan by attending mass despite of his gargantuan knowledge of everything. He was an anthropologist, botanist, cartographer, doctor, educator, farmer, folklorist, geographer----engineer (perito agrimensor), opthalmologist, physician, writer------zoologist..(A-Z). The only thing he can not do is to sing and dance. Rizal was not cursing the church or God, but exposed through his writings the evils of what he experienced and saw. It was the friars that he made poke with in the characters of his two novels (both good and bad). His characterization was annoying in the eyes of the friars who were caught off-guard of their portrayals. Rizal was the political and social commentator of the problems of that period. He never engaged in politics nor wanted to be a president or a politician. Above all, he never cursed GOD. He is a staunch advocate of human rights and civic liberties. In a letter to Blumentritt, he even wanted to be a professor in the Philippines. Rizal’s novels awakened the intelligentia in the 1880’s to the abuses of Spanish colonialism. Resistance against the teachings of the church is tantamount to subversion. The suffering of the intelligentia and the liberals, resulted to the awakening of nationalist thought and paved the way to nationalism. The making of the nation was shared by these narratives of suffering. When the progandists in Europe disintegrated, the shards were picked by the local radicals led by Bonifacio and the Katipunan, eventually became the rallying cry of the group leading the road to the revolution and independence of 1896. By burying the indios in ignorance and fanaticism, the friars has found in the indio an inexhaustible mine of exploitation which Rizal resisted-----the suffering indio. He became the voice of the voiceless, the masses. People were discouraged from thinking for themselves and thirst for learning was considered dangerous and subversive. To the clergy, it was easy to control a population who are ignorant of issues. Rizal was not cursing God at all. The Noli and the Fili, his Imagined Community (Anderson, 1984) were protest novels and considered as the soul of the nation. No Filipino scholar, so far, ever match to the entire corpus of Rizal’s work and no Filipino scholar could ignore him (Legarda, 1974). If he were alive today, he is the number one critic of the government. I think Rizal has no right to die at that time at the age of 35. He could have escaped in Dapitan if he dared too. There were attempts to rescue him but he refused. Why did he choose to die? Why did he embrace death that escaping? If it is true that he abandoned his stance during the trial in the December 1896 manifesto (Constantino, 1969) then, he is a coward but his writings proved to be otherwise. To portray Rizal as God is a paradox unless you are a member of a cult who believed that Rizal is the reincarnation of Christ and included in the blessed trinity (God the father, the son, the holy spirit and Rizal). Let us brew and sip perhaps an unlimited coffee for this matter and engage a healthy téte á téte.