See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/356474140

Veneration without Understanding by Renato Constantino

Poster · November 2021

CITATIONS READS
0 268

1 author:

Juri Tullas
Polytechnic University of the Philippines
7 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

The Bangsamoro Question and the National Democratic Option by Jun Valila & The State of Mara Armed Conflict in the Philippines Unresolved National Question or
Question of Governance by Rizal Buendia A critical essay by Juri Tullas View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Juri Tullas on 23 November 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Polytechnic University of the Philippines
College of Political Science and Public Administration

Veneration without Understanding

by Renato Constantino
Reflection Paper by Juri Tullas | BPA 1-1 | PUP-STA.MESA

Our country's history is its cornerstone. History is significant not only for the country, but
also for the community. History provides us with the chance to learn from the mistakes of others.
And it explains a lot about how society got to be the way it is now. As a result, we are in a better
position to make more objective decisions. Remember that there can't be a present without a
past.

Any country has its unique history in terms of how its people defended their land, fought
for freedom and independence, preserved their traditions and culture, and what happened to their
way of life before and after colonialism. It is similar to the Philippines, which has its own history,
which will lead to the recognition of the individuals who are responsible for our country's liberation,
who have made sacrifices for our country, and who represents one of the elements of history.
These two weapons, literature and the use of force, became the principal weapons used by those
who fought for the Philippines' independence. We can't dispute that these two instruments had
the most influence on their history and helped them become a national hero. Without them, our
country's aim will remain independent.

The national revolution marks a pinnacle of success in many nations' history, to which
men's imaginations return time and time again in veneration and for a renewal of trust in freedom.
We value a thorough grasp of our history because it will demonstrate to us how our present has
been corrupted by a wrong view of our past. We are confronted with the present as the future as
we uncover the past. This national revolution is typically the one time in a country's history when
its citizens were the most unified, interested, and determined in the battle for independence.

Many Filipinos wrote about them as a result of their heroism, including the work they
accomplished, criticism of their work, and objectives for our nation, and finally, how magnificent
they are. "Veneration without Understanding”, by Renato Constantino, a pamphlet addressing the
critique of our Philippine National Hero, Dr. Jose Rizal, is one of these works. Jose Rizal became

1
 Polytechnic University of the Philippines
College of Political Science and Public Administration

our National Hero because he battled for independence in a quiet yet effective manner, and he
used his intellect to denounce the Spaniards' inhumane actions. However, according to Renato
Constantino's pamphlet, Rizal should not be considered as a national hero of the Philippines. The
reasons and criticisms directed towards Riza's identity are discussed in this pamphlet. It also
underlines the need for Filipinos to consider the other side of the narrative, rather than relying
solely on a book with inadequate historical knowledge. That is typical of similar instances about
how Rizal battled for our country's freedom and independence, rather than his genuine color and
goal. As we grew older, we identified Rizal as one of the finest national heroes since he was well
educated, a writer, and a true inspiration, and his biography was always the same in our
elementary and secondary school textbooks. Rizal was willing to give up everything for the
country, including his life. That is what makes him a national hero: the heartfelt expression of
compassion for him. Although many national heroes are like this, we can’t deny that "some"
national heroes are not deserving of the label as national heroes.

Renato Costantino, a historiographer, and scholar, taught us to reconsider history, employ

critical thinking, and learn from history. This is why his work will empathize with the other side,
which will help us better comprehend our past. His work had a significant impact on Philippine
history and affected our age.

Rizal's rejection of the revolution has been glossed over in history texts, according to
Constantino, and should therefore be considered antinationalist behavior by the national hero.
His status as a national hero was questioned and questioned because of several incidents that
may have caused us to change our minds. Because Rizal was an ilustrado in his time, he
automatically undervalued the strength and skills of the people, because being an ilustrado
included the opportunity to study and travel to many nations. Furthermore, Rizal refuses to join
the revolutionary forces. They have viewed Rizal's denunciation of the Katipunan as a skeleton
in his closet, as well as the "silent treatment" he has received for his clear opposition to the
Revolution. The pervasive stature and towering renown of Rizal have always cast a pall on the
Philippine Revolution. Because Rizal did not participate in the Revolution and in fact condemned
it, public opinion of our revolution is not as positive as it may be. We can explain Katipunan even
without including Rizal, for the fact that he declined to join the revolutionary forces indicates that
he was anti-revolutionary. He never engaged in a bloody battle, was never in Balintawak, and
tore his cedula as a symbol of the end of Spanish colonial rule and persecution. But, rather than
fighting with force, he utilized his knowledge to write about the oppressors, the Spaniards, in his

2
 Polytechnic University of the Philippines
College of Political Science and Public Administration

two most renowned works, Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, which served as a started
waking call to the Filipinos.

The purpose of Renato Constantino's work is to persuade us that Jose Rizal was only a
moment in time in the nineteenth century, and that he should not be honored as a national hero.
He deserved to be referred to as a "national hero," and anybody who battled for our freedom
should be referred to as such, whether in paper or via the use of force. Constantino underlines
how Filipinos got so enamored by Rizal that even Americans were given the opportunity to visit
our nation. The American sponsorship took two forms: on the one side, supporting a Rizal cult,
and on the other, diminishing the relevance of other heroes, if not outright vilifying them. Some
Filipinos formed the "Rizalist cult" movement, claiming that Rizal should be venerated as a saint.
This is the precise remark Constantino was attempting to create. We must be cautious of our
heroes; we must appreciate them but not to the point of obsession, and even Rizal was unaware
of this; he desired our freedom and independence. It is not his fault that Filipinos are so fascinated
with him; it is the people's problem.

Rizal was likewise labeled a limited hero by Constantino. Rizal's aristocratic and upper-
class upbringing, he argues, has unavoidably molded his philosophy and limited his
understanding of the socioeconomic realities that the lower classes encounter. According to
Constantino, it was because of this constraint that Rizal developed his desire for the Philippines
to be acknowledged as a Spanish province rather than a colony. He saw this as one another
rebuke of the separatist movement that fueled the Katipunan uprising.Revolution was a defiance
of the people's will. There appears to be a conflict between the two acts, but there isn't one. Both
acts were in character; in both cases, Rizal was acting out of patriotism. Because Rizal was an
ilustrado, he believes that revolution is not the only way to achieve freedom, and that education
is the most important aspect of their life. He thought that if the people are well-educated, freedom
becomes right, and that the Philippines state is more likely to be lost in regarding education,
economics, and government. He prefers to be a reformer rather than a revolutionary because he
wants us to be educated and use our minds to fight for the oppressors. Let us agree that the finest
weapon will be the application of our knowledge, because it is not only by practice in our learnings,
but also through critical thinking, that we will win any fight. However, we cannot deny that
everyone, regardless of their level of knowledge, has the right to be free. Because it is one of the
fundamental human rights of individuals to be free in all parts of their lives. The Revolution began
despite his unwillingness to lead it and lasted despite his criticism of it, demonstrating the veracity

3
 Polytechnic University of the Philippines
College of Political Science and Public Administration

of this assertion. By deliberately articulating the unconscious march of events, Rizal benefited his
people. Though his outlook was constrained by his unique class and upbringing, he saw and felt
the challenges of his country more clearly and intensely than his contemporaries. Also, we can
see that the Philippines does not want a conflict, so they deal with diplomacy. However, they were
not granted their goal, and the revolution began since diplomacy is only effective for a limited
time. Rizal is unaware of this, but if he were, he would embrace the idea of revolution.

The absence of critical thinking among his followers has influenced biographers to become
hagiographers. As a result, a critical appraisal of Rizal must necessarily lead to a reassessment
of our notion of history and the role of the individual in it. This is because the emancipation has
become a part of the scaffolding that sustains current awareness to some extent. Constantino
believes that historians' writings should be studied. Because of their works, which only tell a
positive narrative about him, history must be a balance of positive and negative events, or
strengths and flaws. We may agree with Constantino's point that we can learn a lot about Rizal
and history by looking at other people's perspectives. With more logic and historical correctness
than Rizal. This should only concern the deafeningly Rizal will continue to retain a high place in
our national pantheon even if hagiolatry is abolished and he is subjected to a more mature
historical assessment.

Also, according to Constantino, the social interactions generated by Spanish colonization

and subsequent economic development would have produced the nationalist movement whether
or not heroes existed. He also claims that Rizal has numerous qualities that opened the door to
higher expectations of the people, which influenced the individual, but he also claims that the
nationalist fight would have occurred even if Rizal had not existed. Without Rizal, our libertarian
struggle could have taken longer to mature, but the period's economic development would have
ensured the same outcome. Rizal was able to service the pressing social requirements of the
time, needs that resulted from general and historical factors, because he possessed specific
attributes. He is a hero in the view that he had been able to recognize the issues faced by historical
circumstances, recognize the new social requirements, and actively engage in meeting these
demands. He is not, however, a hero in the sense that he could have changed the course of
events. However, as a result of his opposition to the march of Spaniards, Rizal rose up and fought
for freedom. He does not use his wits to bring others down, but he does explain his desire for
freedom from the Spaniards.

4
 Polytechnic University of the Philippines
College of Political Science and Public Administration

As a result, I believe Jose Rizal deserves to be recognized as a national hero who left an
indelible mark on our history. I liked how Constantino explained the ideas, critiques, arguments,
facts, and how Rizal isn't deserving of being called a national hero, but we can't deny that Rizal
is a brave and intelligent hero who used his skills and education to apprise Filipinos about what
was proceeding on during the Spanish Era, as well as to open their eyes and bring them together
through his writing. He demonstrated his love for his nation by protecting the rights of Filipinos,
maintaining the dignity of Filipinos, and bravery that cost him his life because of his principle and
unwavering love for the country. All of his positive qualities exceeded any flaws or flaws he had.
And, like the heroes, we're all flawed human beings. For instance, Jose Rizal was just an ordinary
citizen during his time, and he never wanted to be known, but owing to Spaniards' terrible
treatment of Filipinos, he had the courage to write about what they went through. It is not
necessary to use force or write to be referred to as a national hero; we can be heroes for regular
people in our own manner. We are heroes of ourselves in whatever sort of activity where we
demonstrate our patriotism and nationalism.

5
 Polytechnic University of the Philippines
College of Political Science and Public Administration

References:

Constantino, R. (1972). Veneration without understanding. Journal of Contemporary

Asia. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472337185390141

View publication stats