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

net/publication/358117750

Reflection on Rizal's Defense and Manifesto

Article · January 2022

CITATIONS READS
0 346

1 author:

John Ray Galvez Gatica

Polytechnic University of the Philippines
8 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by John Ray Galvez Gatica on 26 January 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Reflection on Rizal’s Defense and Manifesto

Buhay at Mga Sinulat ni Rizal

John Ray G. Gatica
25/01/2022
 Much can be said in favor and against the national hero Dr. Jose Rizal. Among the
proverbial heroes of the Philippines, Rizal might be the most enigmatic of the group. It is as though
people cannot have a unison interpretation of Jose Rizal. The hero’s supporters believes that
Rizal is in fact a martyr that sacrificed his own life in exchange for the liberty of the Philippines.
Most believe that Rizal is a representation that violence is not necessary in order to succeed in
making a change. While some heavily oppose this notion, believing that Rizal is a traitor to his
countrymen, to the revolutionist ideas of the Katipunan, and ultimately to the independence of the
Philippines.

It is simply amazing how much Rizal was misunderstood in our history. In the case of
Bonifacio, Rizal was looked upon, believing that he will support the Katipunan. For the Spanish
Government, Rizal was misjudged, supposing he is the mastermind behind the armed revolution
against the colonizers. The Americans misinterpret Rizal, propagating the idea that Jose Rizal is
some sort of a golden hero — an exception out of the exceptional heroes of the Philippine history.
Nothing encapsulates this shroud of enigma more than the Defense and Manifesto of Rizal
himself.

On December 15, 1896, during his imprisonment on Fort Santiago, Rizal wrote the
Manifesto a Algunos Filipinos (Manifesto to Certain Filipinos). On this letter, Rizal revealed that
his name was being used as propaganda and battle cry behind his back. In turn, Rizal refuted
participating, inspiring, and supporting the revolution of the Katipunan. Jose Rizal believes that
the idea of an armed revolution is absurd; in fact, Rizal opposed the idea the second he learned
what was being planned. Rizal testify the absolute impossibility of the armed revolution; going as
far as offering his service, name, and even his own life to suppress the rebellion.

Rizal made it clear that his desire for the liberty of the Philippines still stand true, but he
also made it clear that these must come from education and hard work. Rizal thinks that for the
Filipino people to gain liberty, they must first be worthy of it. Rizal also wrote and believes that for
reforms to succeed it must come from above, as those that comes from below are irregular and
insecure of changes. As a result, Rizal condemns the revolution; deeming it as a savage rebellion
that is plotted behind his back. Rizal considers the armed movement as a dishonor to the Filipinos
and discredit those who can be the advocates of reforms (such as Rizal himself). In the end, Rizal
was still deeply rooted in his ideas. Rizal was still a reformist, hoping that Spain would grant the
Philippines democracy.
 Rizal further express his opposition to the revolution; he states his previous attempts to
enforce reforms in the Philippines by pleading for representation in the Spanish Cortes. Rizal
adds that along with freedom of the press, these changes would appease the discord between
the Filipino people and the Spanish government. Moreover, Rizal claims to play the part of a “free
press” for the people, a Deputy of the Philippines, bridging the gap between the government and
the natives. Rizal recount that the years where he is actively participating in politics (1884 – 1891),
there were neither mutinies nor riots nor political banishments. Rizal surmise that this is because
he acts as the escape valves for the anguish of the people. Since the year 1884, Rizal wrote
about the situation of the public, with the hopes to achieve reforms. Rizal reveals the corruption
and the abuses that is endured by the colony. It seems like Rizal was considering himself as a
sort of an equalizer among the two parties. His exile to Dapitan on 1892 closed the valve that
keeps the tension between the people and the Government from igniting.

Rizal argues that his aspirations for the Filipino people were not criminal, despite the
Government considering it as one; he claims that these aspirations were only the product of the
Spanish education he receives from a young age. Rizal explains that the patriotic ember inside of
him was the direct result of the great thinkers of the Spanish, Greece, and Roman history.
Furthermore, books and newspapers give Rizal an idea of what a nation could be, this resulted
in him aspiring more for his native land.

In elaboration of his words, Rizal explains “to enjoy democratic rights” does not necessarily
mean “to have independence”. As Rizal suggest “A people can be free without being independent,
and a people can be independent without being free.” While Rizal points out in his previous works
that an armed revolution is a possible outcome if reforms and democratic rights were not granted
to the Filipino people, he did not expect this possibility would come through. For Rizal, a revolution
is the final act, the last resort; and independence gained through this means would cause
bloodshed. Rizal argues that in examination of the statutes of the La Liga Filipina (a reformist
organization founded by Rizal), it would appear that what Rizal wanted was unity and
development of the Philippines through non-violent means. This was a direct opposition to the
movement of the Katipunan that was essentially an uprising of the commoners.

Rizal’s Manifesto capture the essence of his previous writings. As in “Noli me Tangere”
and “El Filibusterimo” Rizal told the narrative that a violent revolution would eminently lead to
failure. In his first novel, Elias symbolizes the burning desire for revolution, while Ibarra
counteracts this ideology, relying on education and due process to free the people. On its sequel,
Rizal flipped the script putting Ibarra as the main perpetrator of an armed movement. In both
novels, a revolution failed to succeed. While Rizal’s works abhor the abuses and the exploitation
that the Filipino people suffer from the Colonial Government and the Friars, Rizal never
encouraged for an abrupt and disruptive approach towards independence. In his works, Rizal
never justify violent uprising. Although he acknowledges that an armed revolution is probable, he
abstains from supporting such actions. Time and time again, Rizal always put forward education
as the primary tool in stopping the abuses. Reforms and representation would bring forth
independence.

It would be misleading to label Rizal as a traitor to the Katipunan, as he never was a part
of this movement to begin with. Even before the inception of the movement, Rizal was adamant
in reforms. Rizal never imply support for a revolution in his works, there is not a hint of traitorous
behavior in his manifesto. It was simply how Rizal was from the very beginning, add to that the
deception the Katipunan practiced, using Rizal’s name to recruit members to the organization. It
would be easy to see why Rizal reacted the way he did towards the Katipunan. Moreover, when
Pio Valenzuela visited Rizal in Dapitan courtesy of Bonifacio, Rizal explicitly told Valenzuela that
he did not want any participation with the movement. However, Rizal advice Valenzuela that a
revolution should not be started until funds and sufficient arms are secured. Rizal adds that the
Katipunan should win over wealthy Filipinos in order to gain their support. Rizal goes as far as
recommending his friend, Antonio Luna as a commander of the Katipunan’s forces due to his
extensive military knowledge.

Likewise, it would be false to brand Rizal as a traitor to his country. It is indicated in his
works the unwavering love for his native land. Rizal gave the voice the people lacked, Rizal stood
up for what he believed is true, and Rizal sacrificed his family’s and his own fate for the country.
Furthermore, Rizal was not a traitor to the independence of the Philippines, he simply had a
different plan in obtaining it. Rizal believes that the Philippines and its people was not ready to
self-govern yet. Hence, he refuses to gain total independence, settling for liberty instead. In
addition, Rizal believes that time will come that Spain would abandon the Philippines like it tried
to do many years prior. If the Filipino people were nurtured in education, they would’ve become
worthy of independence. If the people knew the consequences and the burden of self-governing,
then the people can adjust and properly lead the country to new heights.

Representing Rizal on his trial was Lt. Luis Taviel de Andrade — a familiar name out of
the list that Rizal was to choose his defense counsel with. On Rizal’s trial, his camp raised 12
points that proves Rizal’s innocence against the accusations of rebellion, sedition, and illegal
association.
 Rizal’s Defense are as follows:

1. He could not be guilty of rebellion, for he advised Dr Pio Valenzuela in Dapitan not to
rise in revolution.

2. He did not correspond with the radical, revolutionary elements.

3. The revolutionists used his name without his knowledge. If he were guilty, he could
have escaped in Singapore.

4. If he had a hand in the revolution, he could have escaped in a Moro vinta and would
not have built a home, a hospital, and bought lands in Dapitan.

5. If he were the chief of the revolution, why was he not consulted by the revolutionaries?

6. It was true he wrote the by-laws of the Liga Filipina, but this is only a civic organization
– not a revolutionary society.

7. The Liga Filipina did not live long, for after the first meeting he was banished to Dapitan,
and it died out.

8. If the Liga was reorganized nine months later, he did not know about it.

9. The Liga did not serve the purpose of the revolutionists, otherwise they would not have
supplanted it with the Katipunan.

10. If it were true that there were some bitter comments in Rizal’s letters, it was because
they were written in 1890 when his family was being persecuted, being dispossessed of houses,
warehouses, lands, etc., and his brother and all brothers-in-law were deported.

11. His life in Dapitan had been exemplary as the politico-military commanders and
missionary priests could attest.

12. It was not true that the revolution was inspired by his one speech at the house of
Doroteo Ongjunco, as alleged by witnesses whom he would like to confront. His friends knew his
opposition to armed rebellion. Why did the Katipunan send an emissary to Dapitan who was
unknown to him? Because those who knew him were aware that he would never sanction any
violent movement.

The military court ruled against the pleads of Rizal. Following a short discussion, Rizal
was ordered to be shot in musketry until death at Bagumbayan in the morning of December 30,
1896.
 In examination of Rizal’s defense, it eminent that Rizal tries to disassociate himself with
the Katipunan. Rizal brought up the fact that the La Liga was a short-lived organization, as Rizal
was arrested and exiled to Dapitan shortly after its commencement. Thus, if the La Liga was
regrouped during his stay in Dapitan, Rizal has nothing to do with it. Furthermore, the La Liga was
not a revolutionist organization. Rizal argues that his colleague knew Rizal was against an armed
revolution, if he was involved in the inner workings of the Katipunan, he would’ve recognized Pio
Valenzuela. Rizal adds that during his exile, he was an exemplary, if he was participating in an
uprising, he would have not settled in Dapitan for four years. Rizal claims if he was in any way
guilty, he could have easily escaped Dapitan, as his friends convinced him to do so. But Rizal
stayed, protesting his innocence.

125 years after Rizal’s death, he is still misunderstood. Rizal was cursed with knowledge
and the strong urge of responsibility for his native land. But he wants to attain the betterment of
the Philippines in a non-violent means. I think the reason Rizal was so misunderstood is because
he is not the cookie cutter type of heroes most of us are accustomed to. He did not want war, and
he did not wield guns and bolos to defeat his enemies. Rizal had a vision, but this vision does not
align with the vision of the Katipunan. Thus, some mislabel him as a traitor when Rizal was not
associated with the movement itself. We can argue that Rizal was not in favor of total
independence, because he believes that the country and its people are not yet ready. But when
are we ready? I believe that Rizal’s views are too idealistic to come true. But we can still commend
his sacrifices, for he gave so much yet some people only saw the worst in Rizal.
 References:

F. (2022, January 21). The One Terrible Mistake That Changed Antonio Luna’s Life Forever.

FilipiKnow. https://filipiknow.net/antonio-luna-betrayal-

katipunan/#:%7E:text=No%20less%20than%20Jose%20Rizal,and%20equal%20treatmen

t%20with%20Spain.

Guerrero, L. M., & Quirino, C. (1974). The First Filipino (Reprint ed.). National Historical

Institute.

Melendez, C. B. (2012, September 19). Rizal Issues a Manifesto to Proclaim his Innocence.

National Historical Commission of the Philippines (NHCP). Retrieved January 25, 2022,

from https://nhcp.gov.ph/rizal-issues-a-manifesto-to-proclaim-his-

innocence/#:~:text=Of%20the%20numerous%20preserved%20notes,his%20incarceratio

n%20in%20Fort%20Santiago.

Wikipedia contributors. (2021, December 4). Pío Valenzuela. Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%ADo_Valenzuela

Xiao Time: Ang Manifesto ni Dr. Jose Rizal (Veneration Without Understanding, nga ba?).

(2020, June 4). [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_otg-Vo-

1_g&t=41s

Blog. (n.d.). JOSE RIZAL: TRIAL, EXECUTION AND MARTYRDOM.

https://rizalgroup9.weebly.com/

View publication stats