2003-41755 PI 100-JD October 17, 2006

Jose Rizal’s Concept of a Nation: Past, Present and Future

Throughout Rizal’s works, one can see his concept of the Filipino nation. And in

examining his concept of the nation, it is but necessary to go back to his writings about

the history of the archipelago. In his works, Rizal sought to portray a picture of the pre-

colonial Philippines. His portrayal of the pre-colonial times could be evidently seen in his

annotations of Morga and also in his other works. But Rizal did not dwell in studying

history; instead, he used it to bridge the past to the present. And from there, he formed

his concept of the future Filipino nation.

The Pre-Colonial Past

How did Rizal portray the pre-colonial past? How different is his arguments from

that of the Orientalists and from that of his other compatriots? His version of the story of

Mariang Makiling expresses his view on the pre-colonial past, like his other works. In

“Waiting for Mariang Makiling,” Resil Mojares reads Rizal’s version of the story as a

‘broad sweep of history, embedding the past, present and the future’. The author also

discusses how Rizal used the tale to describe three worlds, the Edenic world (pre-

colonial), the post-Edenic world (colonial) and the unwritten or emergent (the future).

The Edenic world was described as one where man and nature are one. Makiling, which

represents nature, occasionally comes down from the mountains to help the local folks.

This represents the relationship of the natives with nature before the colonization of

Spain. In here, nature provides the people with what they need. Indeed, in those times,

the people were dependent on what nature would give them. The rich natural resources

(which were the target of colonizers) were their source of survival and livelihood.

1
 Another portrayal of the past can also be found in Jose Rizal’s “Isang Alaala.”

This article talks about the memories of a man about his youth. He remembers being in

his homeland which is a beautiful place. There, he meets a young girl and an old

woman by the river when he went to take a bath in the river. The two instantly became

friends despite the cautious woman who kept watching the two. In this literary piece,

Rizal talks about the beauty and innocence of young people, who lack experience, who

see only the good and the beautiful and are unsuspicious of other people. We can liken

this description to Rizal’s portrayal of the natives before the Spanish colonization. Here,

the natives’ relationship to nature is also seen, like what was mentioned above in the

discussion about the story of Mariang Makiling. But more than the harmonious

relationship of the natives to their natural surroundings, Rizal associates the

characteristics of pre-colonial natives with the memories of the main character’s youth.

Here, the article implies that the natives were easily trusting and innocent, just like the

main characters in the story. This is why the colonizers easily gained the trust of the

natives and entered into the blood compact. But, as the title denotes, they are now only

memories of the past, like the memories of the main character. For soon enough,

innocence faded and people learned to become suspicious of others. This corresponds

to the change in the attitude of the natives in the advent of colonization, who lost their

innocence and became wary of others.

But apart from these depictions of the past, Rizal, through his Morga and his

other works, portrayed a more radical picture of the pre-colonial times in contrast to

Orientalist accounts and his compatriots’ views. This argument could be seen in the

article “A Grand Narrative of Redemption and Tragedy.” In here, Rizal was said to

depict the pre-colonial past in this way: “Filipinas had a civilization of her own and was

progressing, armed with her own capacities and virtues.” This is in deep contrast to the

2
view of Orientalists and even some of Rizal’s compatriots that the natives had an inferior

civilization or were not at all civilized.

Also, in the article “The Morga and Reclaiming History,” Rizal disproved the

argument of the colonizers about the indolence of the Filipinos and their ingratitude to

Spain. He did this by studying the past, where he asserted the prosperity and civilization

of the natives. He also gave an answer to the question, “why did the natives succumb to

the colonizers?” He offered two explanations, the first being the nature of the pre-

colonial social structure and the other being the lack of national sentiment. The first one

refers to the tyrannical aristocracy that prevailed in the pre-colonial society. Because of

the tyranny of the rulers, the people did not wish to defend their rulers against the

colonizers nor did the rulers fought back, seeing that the colonizers were more powerful.

The second refers to the lack of unity among the natives. This was the problem he saw

from the past and what he deemed important to shape the country’s future. This is what

bridged his search from the past to the search for solutions for the problems of the

present and ultimately to his concept of the nation, which lies in the future.

In general, Rizal asserted that the Filipinos had a progressing civilization, that

they had a glorious past. Rizal wanted to disprove the arguments of the Spaniards that

the natives were brutos salvajes, and therefore, needed the colonizers in order to be

civilized. He attempted to reconstruct the past in order to compare it to the conditions of

the present. By showing that the Filipinos were indeed civilized even before the coming

of the Spaniards, he was able to show that colonization only brought disaster and

underdevelopment as was shown by the conditions prevailing in the archipelago in his

time.

Now that we have seen how Rizal portrayed the past, we go to how he viewed

the country in his time. But let us first start with the colonization of the archipelago.

3
What were the methods used by Spain to colonize the islands? What institutions did

they introduce in order to keep the natives under their control?

The Colonized Philippines

We start with the fact that colonization started from European expeditions to

other parts of the world. These expeditions were aimed at bringing back gold, spices

and other materials to Europe for economic gains. They were also aimed at territorial

expansion. The article “Ang Tradisyong Kolonyal” discusses how the colonization of the

islands came about. According to this article, after Magellan’s expedition, the islands

were targeted by the Spaniards. From 1565, the Spaniards started gathering the natives

and made them live permanently in pueblos. This was called reduccion. After forcing

the natives to live in towns or pueblos, it became easier for the colonizers to put the

natives under their control. Then they introduced foreign social structures such as

religious, economic and political institutions. The natives were converted to Roman

Catholicism for many reasons. First, religion wielded power and control to the

colonizers. Second, they did it to counter the spread of the Reformation current in

Europe and to further strengthen Catholicism. Lastly, the Spaniards were shocked at

the practices and lifestyle of the natives (e.g. walking around almost naked). But apart

from religion, they also installed political and governmental institutions like the position of

Governor-General, the Audencia and others that were still aimed at controlling the

natives. Moreover, the Spaniards introduced the encomienda system where land-

grabbing resulted. The natives were stripped of their lands and were made to work

without pay in building ships, churches and other infrastructures.

Also, the Spaniards imposed upon the people their culture and lifestyle. They

changed the writing system of the natives and taught the natives the Western alphabet.

Then they used literary works like novels, corridos, plays, songs and others to articulate

4
colonial mentality. The educational system that they built also reflected their desire to

keep the Indios under their control. Rizal, which was part of the 19 th century Philippines,

then saw the problems that had arisen from colonization and began to paint a picture of

it by producing his two famous novels, the Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo.

The first novel, the Noli Me Tangere, was primarily aimed at showing the current

conditions of the natives in the hands of Spain. In the article “The Discourse of the

Other: a Reading of Rizal’s Novels” Epifanio San Juan stated that Rizal envisioned the

organic shape of society afflicted with malignant cancer. He then proceeds to discuss

the arguments of Rizal about what happened to the natives when they were made

slaves by the Spaniards using an analysis on the characters and the story about them.

Rizal points out to the social imbalance in the colonized islands when he depicted a

mocking catalogue of the rulers. The novel has characters like Padre Damaso, Padre

Salvi, Kapitan Tiyago and others whose flaws and corrupt characters have been shown.

Also, in chapter 46 of the Noli, San Juan noted three interconnected layers of the

colonial society. The first concerns the general setting of the cockpit with vice producing

revenue for the government; second comes the major participants like the

gobernadorcillo, the cacique class and others; and lastly, their victims especially the

lumpen elements, which of course symbolize the common natives.

As we know, the characters Rizal created in the novel signified the real condition

of the people in the country, may they be native or Spaniard. Elias, for one, affirms

man’s power to dictate the direction of his life. He was proven wise, as he rejected

vengeance against Ibarra. But moreover, he was the character that Rizal wants to

identify with, in contrast with the leftist claim that Rizal identified with Ibarra. This is

because Elias, in contrast with Ibarra, set aside his quest for revenge in order to unite

with Ibarra in the purpose of fighting against colonial domination. San Juan also talked

about Kapitan Tiyago, who belongs to the merchant class and therefore has a

5
considerable status yet has aligned himself to the friars’ interests and succumbed to

them as a servant. Another character, Doña Consolacion, also reflects the “grotesque

pattern of marital relationship in the lower echelons.” Though she was powerful over

other Indios like her husband, the alferez, she was still a slave. Her unhappy life

symbolizes the end-result of the long dehumanization of the Indio.

Floro Quibuyen, in his “A Grand Narrative of Redemption and Tragedy,” also

speaks of the symbols in the Noli like the forest and again, Elias. The forest, which has

been Elias’ abode, stands for sacred space, freedom, and redemption in contrast to the

towns that signify slavery. Here we go back to the reduccion mentioned earlier which

was used by the Spaniards to manipulate and monitor the natives. The towns were

therefore territories created by Spain and were subject to their authority. In line with this

argument, Elias, who came from the forest, was therefore someone who is in touch with

nature, free and imbued with power. But unlike a hermit, Elias was not wholly detached

from the society, but became someone who was neither inside nor outside the society.

This enabled Elias to see the cancer of the society.

Going back to the mountain or the forest as a symbol, we can easily link it up

with the last chapter of the Noli, which used the forest as the main setting. The chapter

opens with a happy family living high up in the mountains. The mountains can be

considered the family and also Basilio’s sanctuary. But as Basilio decided to go back to

the town, the mood shifted from a happy to a dark and dreary one. Here, the town was

shown as quiet in spite of the Christmas season. Basilio finds his mother and chases

her into the forest owned by Don Rafael. This is where the two finds refuge. In the end

the accursed forest becomes the final sanctuary for Elias and Sisa.

From this point, we can say that the Noli depicted the reality of Rizal’s time. It

speaks about the corruption of the rulers of the land, the subdued middle class and the

poor victims of colonization. Here we can see that Rizal did not attempt to glorify the

6
natives and show prejudice against the Spanish. Instead, he showed that the

misfortunes and the flawed character of the natives were brought about as effects of the

dehumanization they received from the Spaniards. But, the end does not seem to say

anything about the solutions to the problems that were shown in the earlier part of the

novel. The only recourse that was given could be found in Elias’ last words to Basilio,

urging him to use the treasure he hid in order to be educated. Interestingly, though not

much recourse was given, Elias still urges the youth not to give up but to have hope. In

his last statement, he makes an appeal to the next generation, not only to Basilio, to

continue what their elders have accomplished.

What was lacking in the Noli Me Tangere, Rizal makes up for his second novel,

the El Filibusterismo. In this novel, Rizal explores the many paths that the natives could

choose to take in fighting against colonialism. In the Fili, Quibuyen notes that there is a

nationalist dilemma: how can one push the nationalist agenda without having resulting to

more violence and oppression? The novel started with a call for arms but in the end, it

turned out to be unsuccessful. We go to chapter 35 of the El Filibusterismo. In the

chapter, the plot to bomb a gathering of the merchant class, friars, government officials

and others was about to be carried out. Basilio, knowing the plot, decided to leave and

persuaded Isagani to do the same. But in the end, there was no explosion as Isagani

opted to prevent it from happening. From this event, we see that violent means are

abandoned.

In John Schumacher’s “The Noli Me Tangere as Catalyst of Revolution,” the

author talks about the two recourses offered in the El Fili, the path chosen by Simoun,

which is armed violence, and that of Father Florentino, which is active nonviolent

resistance. As was said earlier, the former recourse of violence was rejected but the

recourse of non violent resistance wasn’t so much described by Rizal. The open ending

of both novels signify the intention of Rizal to leave the choice to the Filipinos

7
themselves. Going back to “Waiting for Mariang Makiling,” we see that Rizal follows the

same theme. The reason that he gave for Makiling’s withdrawal lies in the activities and

the attitudes of the natives. Then he ends the story by waiting for the return of Makiling,

an indication that there is still hope and that the Filipinos have the power to act.

This also means that Rizal had a separatist stance, for he urged the Filipinos to

depend on themselves and not on Spain for reforms in the country. But still, he

question lingers, what was his view on the Revolution? If his novels say that he didn’t

favor bloodshed, then what was the recourse left for him? This problem could be clarified

in the last poem written by Rizal, his “Huling Pahimakas.” Here, he doesn’t condemn

those who choose to revolt and admire those who choose martyrdom; but he recognizes

them both and says that both should be accepted if Motherland demands that they be

given. As for him however, he already chose martyrdom.

Now that we have discussed the means, we now delve into the goal which is to

gain independence and form a free nation. Here, we will discuss what Rizal really meant

when he talked about the Filipino nation. Is it going back to the pre-colonial past, or just

driving away the colonizers? As Schumacher put it, Rizal maintained to the end that the

revolutionary goal was to create a nation of Filipinos conscious of their human and

national dignity and ready to sacrifice themselves to defend it. It is worthy to note that

Rizal did not dwell in accomplishing independence alone; instead, his vision extended to

the dilemma of which path to take after gaining independence. He confronts this

problem by sharing to others his concept of the Filipino nation. But what exactly is the

Filipino nation? Is the current state of the country in line with Rizal’s vision of the Filipino

nation? Who are the members of this nation that Rizal was dreaming about more than a

hundred years ago?

8
Rizal’s Concept of the Filipino Nation

In “Rizal’s Concept of the Filipino Nation,” Quibuyen talks about how Rizal came

up with his idea of the Filipino nation. According to this article, during Rizal’s time, there

were two ways in which the word Filipino was used. One was concerned with ethno-

racial identity or blood ties while the other makes use of the word in a political sense.

Now how did Rizal used the term Filipino? Was it based on blood ties or does it

encompass ethno-racial dimensions? The answer to this question can be found in the

two dimensions of Rizal’s concept of nation. The first is a cultural dimension where the

nation is a historically constituted community of language and culture. The second is the

ethical dimension in which the nation is a moral community where members are bound

by a commitment to the common good. In short, Rizal thought of a nation that is

nonracial and antistatist. Now where did he get such ideas?

Rizal’s political ideas primarily came from the Enlightenment tradition. But more

than that, he was also influenced by the ideas of Herder. Herder asserted that the

integrity of all peoples has intrinsic value which is to be respected; that climatic and

geographic factors are also important and that human rights, freedom and dignity should

be promoted. Aside from that, Herder also asserted the importance of language. He

argues that language embodies the totality of culture and history of a people. Herder’s

concept of nation thus, can be put as an organically evolving community of language

and culture, not of blood ties.

Another influence on Rizal was the Latin dictum “Vox populi, vox Dei” which

literally means the voice of the people is the voice of God. This is in stark contrast with

the American idea of a nation-state, which can be summarized as “Vox imperium, vox

populi.” The difference lies in the principle of political obligation wherein Rizal asserts

the distinction between the ruler and the ruled. Because of this difference, the ruler must

exercise power with much morality. From Rizal’s perspective, when the State or any

9
other factor, should prevent the people to bring about their fullest development, it is

man’s duty to struggle against these obstacles. And when they do, they fulfill God’s will,

hence the statement vox populi, vox Dei.

Rizal also explores the idea of national sentiment. There are actually two related

meanings of this phrase. One is national in contrast with the individual. Here national

refers to the common good of the people. The other one is national spirit wherein there

is a sense of solidarity created by the same experience of being colonized and exploited.

However, national sentiment is not equated to commonality; rather, the sense of

common abasement awakens national sentiment.

Rizal’s concept has therefore three features: first, a rejection of colonialism and

injustice; second, a sense of solidarity rooted in a national history and culture; and lastly,

mutual concern and responsibility for the common good. From these three, we can say

that national sentiment refers to the moral and cultural bonds which unite a people into a

nation wherein the common good is promoted.

In Quibuyen’s “Rizal and the Recovery of History, Culture and Community,” Rizal

did not only espouse this idea of the Filipino nation but set out to make an example of it.

In his years in Dapitan, he has concentrated in helping the people construct a

community that could become the beginning of the formation of a nation. Here he puts

his ideas into action as he strived to provide the people with medical services, education,

economic capacity and other social services. Because of his efforts and the people’s

cooperation, big improvements were made in Dapitan. This is a great exemplar of how

he wanted development to come in the country. The reason that he doesn’t favor

bloodshed is because it might turn the wrong direction. Instead, he favors the formation

of a Filipino nation by first enhancing the capabilities of the people; that is, educating

them and helping them improve their conditions.

10
 Now it becomes clear that the nation Rizal dreams of consists of the civil society,

a society that has reclaimed its history and culture. After the reforms in the civil society,

this national community would strive for independence from colonizers. Then a cultural

and ethical community would be formed, protecting the common good.

But Rizal’s vision does not end in the Filipino nation alone. Quibuyen notes that

there is a similarity between Rizal and other intellectuals from other colonized countries

like Fanon, Cabral and Marti. Major themes in their life works include the struggle

against colonialism, a critique of nationalism, advocacy of international solidarity,

humanist vision of justice and the quest for an ethical community in the form of a

democratic civil society. We can see here that Rizal did not only aim for a national

struggle but an international opposition to colonialism as he also considered the

formation of pan-Malay solidarity against domination. In the end, it could be said that

Rizal did not only seek the formation of a Filipino nation but also the creation of an

international community.

Critique

Though Rizal’s concept of a nation could be plausible, it is still not without

problems. The first problem lies on the membership of the nation that Rizal was

dreaming of. Who are the members of this nation? The answer was already given: the

nation would be formed not from blood ties or racial identity but from a common culture

and language and the common experience of colonization. But, this also poses a

problem for other Philippine ethnic groups like the Cordillerans and the Muslims. These

groups were not colonized by the Spaniards and therefore do not have the same

experience as the other natives and have become culturally different from them because

of the changes that were brought about by colonization. So where are these groups in

11
Rizal’s notion of nation? It seems to me that these groups are implicitly excluded or

were not taken into account by Rizal’s notion of the Filipino nation.

Another problem encountered here is the premise that the nation would be

formed from a common culture and language. I disagree with Rizal that the archipelago

has a “common culture” and a “common language.” At one point, one can even say that

the inhabitants of the islands had different traditions and forms of government before the

coming of the Spaniards. The diversity of the ethnic minority in the Philippines today

proves that the natives had distinct cultures and dialects. In line with this, we go back to

the argument of Rizal on why the natives were easily subdued. Rizal’s first reason

concerns the pre-colonial social structure and leadership, which is tyrannical in nature.

But there are actually many kinds of social structure among Philippine ethnic groups and

the one used by Rizal is only one of them. The other kinds of government in the

archipelago include the rule of the warriors, practiced by the Kalingas; the rule of the

wealthy, which is practiced in Bontoc; and lastly, egalitarian leadership for the

Mangyans. Therefore, the tyranny of the rulers in the pre-colonial times may not be said

as prevalent throughout the islands and could not be said as the common factor that led

to the defeat of the natives. I would also like to criticize the other reason that Rizal gave

for the subjugation of the natives: the lack of national sentiment. How could the natives

have that national sentiment if, prior to colonization, they considered themselves

different from each other? Remember that the natives were not united before the

coming of the Spaniards; instead, there were many small “kingdoms” or barangays that

were autonomous from each other and were either friendly or hostile to their neighbors.

If this was the case, then having a national sentiment was improbable. And even if the

natives united to fight against the colonizers, it would be called an alliance of many

barangays or a historic bloc in the Gramscian sense rather than a national struggle. We

also bear into mind that there wasn’t even a Philippines before the Spaniards came; the

12
notion of “the Philippines” was only brought about by colonization. And that Philippines

wasn’t even a nation in itself but a colony created by Spain.

Even though Rizal’s concept of the nation is not unproblematic, the fact still

remains that this approach to development is a holistic one. It doesn’t only dwell in the

values of freedom and liberty but also takes into account the other important aspects of

a nation such as ethics and culture. It is also interesting to note that what Rizal did in his

years in Dapitan is the same approach that is favored today by the United Nations.

Rizal’s idea of development, which includes economic, cultural and political, coincides

with the Human Development Paradigm that the United Nations Development Program

promotes today.

This only goes to show that Rizal’s concept of the nation might not be obsolete at

all and can still be used by the present generation to develop the Filipino nation. Thus, it

is important to go back to Rizal’s writings and reread it in the light of the present for it

might be of help to solving the current problems of the country, especially those that

stemmed from the colonial past.

13