Monday, March 14, 2022


"To be persuasive we must be believable; to be believable we must be credible; credible we must be truthful." - Edward R. Murrow (1908-1965)

"If you are not careful the media will have you hating the people who are being oppressed and loving the people who are doing the oppressing." - Malcolm X (1925-1965)



1. Colored and/or underlined words are HTML links. Click on them to see the linked posts/articles. PLEASE SHARE: Forwarding this and other posts to relatives and friends, especially those in the homeland, is greatly appreciated. To share, use all social media tools: email, blog, Google+, Tumblr, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, etc. THANKS!!
2. Click the following underlined title/link to checkout these Essential/Primary Readings About Us Filipino Natives:
3. Instantly translate to any of 71 foreign languages. Go to the sidebar on the right to choose your language. Fellow native Filipinos translation in Cebuano and Tagalog.
4. The postings are oftentimes long and a few readers have claimed being "burnt out."  My apologies...The selected topics are not for entertainment but to stimulate deep, serious thoughts per my MISSION Statement and hopefully to rock our boat of ignorance, apathy, complacency, and hopefully lead to active citizenship.

REMINDER: March 3, 2022. The total number of postings to date =578. Use keywords in the sidebar: PAST POSTINGS, Click LABEL (sorted by number of related posts)
    to access.
    From the time our Katipunan revolutionaries fought and died against the Spanish rule, and against American interference and colonization then, our society has been administered by a "cacique, " the socio-economic elite in cahoots with foreigners against their fellow native Filipino majority, keeping them poor, illiterate, and thus ignorant.
    A socioeconomic and political system designed to perpetuate a class-defined society, a class-conscious country, divided and never really becoming a nation.
    We are schooled heavily about political democracy but do not know that economic democracy is a prerequisite to fully realizing it. We have been conditioned to believe that mere and regular election makes a democracy; an illusion in reality.
    We native Filipinos keep ourselves ignorant of history, of “what’s really going on” in our homeland then and now; and thus, by default, never learn.
    We continue to be lost -having failed or refused to look in the mirror- believing in fate rather than about us people causing the cliche “history keeps repeating itself” true and valid.
    That is why it's Deja vu every time.
    - BMDūü§Ē
    The CIA and the Media
    by Carl Bernstein
    Rolling Stone, Oct. 20, 1977
    In 1953, Joseph Alsop, then one of America's leading syndicated columnists, went to the Philippines to cover an election. He did not go because he was asked to do so by his syndicate. He did not go because he was asked to do so by the newspapers that printed his column. He went at the request of the CIA.
    Alsop is one of more than 400 American journalists who in the past twenty-five years have secretly carried out assignments for the Central Intelligence Agency, according to documents on file at CIA headquarters.
    Some of these journalists' relationships with the Agency were tacit; some were explicit. There was cooperation, accommodation, and overlap. Journalists provided a full range of clandestine services -- from simple intelligence gathering to serving as go-betweens with spies in Communist countries. Reporters shared their notebooks with the CIA. Editors shared their staffs. Some of the journalists were Pulitzer Prize winners, distinguished reporters who considered themselves ambassadors-without-portfolio for their country. Most were less exalted: foreign correspondents who found that their association with the Agency helped their work; stringers and freelancers who were as interested in the derring-do of the spy business as in filing articles, and, the smallest category, full-time CIA employees masquerading as journalists abroad. In many instances, CIA documents show, journalists were engaged to perform tasks for the CIA with the consent of the management of America's leading news organizations.
    The history of the CIA's involvement with the American press continues to be shrouded by an official policy of obfuscation and deception . . . .
    Among the executives who lent their cooperation to the Agency was William Paley of the Columbia Broadcasting System, Henry Luce of Time Inc., Arthur Hays Sulzberger of the New York Times, Barry Bingham Sr. of the Louisville Courier-Journal and James Copley of the Copley News Service. Other organizations which cooperated with the CIA include the American Broadcasting Company, the National Broadcasting Company, the Associated Press, United Press International, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps-Howard, Newsweek magazine, the Mutual Broadcasting System, The Miami Herald, and the old Saturday Evening Post and New York Herald-Tribune. By far the most valuable of these associations, according to CIA officials, have been with The New York Times, CBS, and Time Inc.
    ... From the Agency's perspective, there is nothing untoward in such relationships, and any ethical questions are a matter for the journalistic profession to resolve, not the intelligence community...
    Many journalists were used by the CIA to assist in this process and they had the reputation of being among the best in the business. The peculiar nature of the job of the foreign correspondent is ideal for such work; he is accorded unusual access, by his host country, permitted to travel in areas often off-limits to other Americans, spends much of his time cultivating sources in governments, academic institutions, the military establishment, and the scientific communities. He has the opportunity to form long-term personal relationships with sources and -- perhaps more than any other category of American operative -- is in a position to make correct judgments about the susceptibility and availability of foreign nationals for recruitment as spies.
    The Agency's dealings with the press began during the earliest stages of the Cold War. Allen Dulles, who became director of the CIA in 1953, sought to establish a recruiting-and-cover capability within America's most prestigious journalistic institutions. By operating under the guise of accredited news correspondents, Dulles believed, CIA operatives abroad would be accorded a degree of access and freedom of movement unobtainable under almost any other type of cover.
    American publishers, like so many other corporate and institutional leaders at the time, were willing us commit the resources of their companies to the struggle against "global Communism." Accordingly, the traditional line separating the American press corps and the government were often indistinguishable: rarely was a news agency used to provide cover for CIA operatives abroad without the knowledge and consent of either its principal owner; publisher, or senior editor. Thus, contrary to the notion that the CIA era and news executives allowed themselves and their organizations to become handmaidens to the intelligence services. "Let's not pick on some poor reporters, for God's sake," William Colby exclaimed at one point to the Church committee's investigators. "Let's go to the management. They were witting" In all, about twenty-five news organizations (including those listed at the beginning of this article) provided cover for the Agency.
    ... Many journalists who covered World War II were close to people in the Office of Strategic Services, the wartime predecessor of the CIA; more important, they were all on the same side. When the war ended and many OSS officials went into the CIA, it was only natural that these relationships would continue.
    Meanwhile, the first postwar generation of journalists entered the profession; they shared the same political and professional values as their mentors. "You had a gang of people who worked together during World War II and never got over it," said one Agency official. "They were genuinely motivated and highly susceptible to intrigue and being on the inside. Then in the Fifties and Sixties, there was a national consensus about a national threat. The Vietnam War tore everything to pieces -- shredded the consensus and threw it in the air." Another Agency official observed: "Many journalists didn't give a second thought to associating with the Agency. But there was a point when the ethical issues that most people had submerged finally surfaced. Today, a lot of these guys vehemently deny that they had any relationship with the Agency."
    ... The CIA even ran a formal training program in the 1950s to teach its agents to be journalists. Intelligence officers were "taught to make noises like reporters," explained a high CIA official, and were then placed in major news organizations with help from management. "These were the guys who went through the ranks and were told, "You're going to be a journalist," the CIA official said. Relatively few of the 400-some relationships described in Agency files followed that pattern, however; most involved persons who were already bona fide journalists when they began undertaking tasks for the Agency. The Agency's relationships with journalists, as described in CIA files, include the following general categories:
    - Legitimate, accredited staff members of news organizations - usually reporters. Some were paid; some worked for the Agency on a purely voluntary basis.
    - Stringers and freelancers. Most were payrolled by the Agency under standard contractual terms.
    - Employees of so-called CIA "proprietaries." During the past twenty-five years, the Agency has secretly bankrolled numerous foreign press services, periodicals, and newspapers -- both English and foreign language -- which provided excellent cover for CIA operatives.
    - Columnists and commentators. There are perhaps a dozen well-known columnists and broadcast commentators whose relationships with the CIA go far beyond those normally maintained between reporters and their sources. They are referred to at the Agency as "known assets" and can be counted on to perform a variety of undercover tasks; they are considered receptive to the Agency"s point of view on various subjects.
    Murky details of CIA relationships with individuals and news organizations began trickling out in 1973 when it was first disclosed that the CIA had, on occasion, employed journalists. Those reports, combined with new information, serve as casebook studies of the Agency's use of journalists for intelligence purposes.
    The New York Times -- The Agency's relationship with the Times was by far its most valuable among newspapers, according to CIA officials. [It was] general Times policy ... to provide assistance to the CIA whenever possible.
    ... CIA officials cite two reasons why the Agency's working relationship with the Times was closer and more extensive than with any other paper: the fact that the Times maintained the largest foreign news operation in American daily journalism; and the close personal ties between the men who ran both institutions...
    The Columbia Broadcasting System -- CBS was unquestionably the CIA's most valuable broadcasting asset. CBS president William Paley and Allen Dulles enjoyed an easy working and social relationship. Over the years, the network provided cover for CIA employees, including at least one well-known foreign correspondent and several stringers; it supplied outtakes of news film to the CIA; established a formal channel of communication between the Washington bureau chief and the Agency; gave the Agency access to the CBS newsfilm library, and allowed reports by CBS correspondents to the Washington and New York newsrooms to be routinely monitored by the CIA. Once a year during the 1950s and early 1960s, CBS correspondents joined the CIA hierarchy for private dinners and briefings.
    ... At the headquarters of CBS News in New York, Paley's cooperation with the CIA is taken for granted by many news executives and reporters, despite the denials. Paley, 76, was not interviewed by Salant's investigators. "It wouldn't do any good," said one CBS executive. "It is the single subject about which his memory has failed."
    Time and Newsweek magazines -- According to CIA and Senate sources, Agency files contain written agreements with former foreign correspondents and stringers for both the weekly news magazines. The same sources refused to say whether the CIA has ended all its associations with individuals who work for the two publications. Allen Dulles often interceded with his good friend, the late Henry Luce, founder of Time and Life magazines, who readily allowed certain members of his staff to work for the Agency and agreed to provide jobs and credentials for other CIA operatives who lacked journalistic experience.
    ... At Newsweek, Agency sources reported, the CIA engaged the services of several foreign correspondents and stringers under arrangements approved by senior editors at the magazine.
    ... "To the best of my knowledge:" said [Harry] Kern, [Newsweek's foreign editor from 1945 to 1956] "nobody at Newsweek worked for the CIA... The informal relationship was there. Why has anybody signed anything? What we knew we told them [the CIA] and the State Department... When I went to Washington, I would talk to Foster or Allen Dulles about what was going on .... We thought it was admirable at the time. We were all on the same side." CIA officials say that Kern's dealings with the Agency were extensive.
    ... When Newsweek was purchased by the Washington Post Company, publisher Philip L. Graham was informed by Agency officials that the CIA occasionally used the magazine for cover purposes, according to CIA sources. "It was widely known that Phil Graham was somebody you could get help from," said a former deputy director of the Agency. . . . But Graham, who committed suicide in 1963, apparently knew little of the specifics of any cover arrangements with Newsweek, CIA sources said.
    ... Information about Agency dealings with the Washington Post newspaper is extremely sketchy. According to CIA officials, some Post stringers have been CIA employees, but these officials say they do not know if anyone in the Post management was aware of the arrangements. ...
    Other major news organizations -- According to Agency officials, CIA files document additional cover arrangements with the following newsgathering organizations, among others: the New York Herald Tribune, Saturday Evening Post, Scripps-Howard Newspapers, Hearst Newspapers, Associated Press, United Press International, the Mutual Broadcasting System, Reuters, and The Miami Herald. ...
    "And that's just a small part of the list," in the words of one official who served in the CIA hierarchy. Like many sources, this official said that the only way to end the uncertainties about aid furnished to the Agency by journalists is to disclose the contents of the CIA files -- a course opposed by almost all of the thirty-five present and former CIA officials interviewed over the course of a year.
    The CIA's use of journalists continued virtually unabated until 1973 when, in response to public disclosure that the Agency had secretly employed American reporters, William Colby began scaling down the program. In his public statements, Colby conveyed the impression that the use of journalists had been minimal and of limited importance to the Agency.
    He then initiated a series of moves intended to convince the press, Congress, and the public that the CIA had gotten out of the news business. But according to Agency officials, Colby had in fact thrown a protective net around his most valuable intelligence assets in the journalistic community.
    ... After Colby left the Agency on January 28th, 1976, and was succeeded by George Bush, the CIA announced a new policy: "Effective immediately, the CIA will not enter into any paid or contractual relationship with any full-time or part-time news correspondent accredited by any U.S. news service, newspaper, periodical, radio or television network or station." . . . The text of the announcement noted that the CIA would continue to "welcome" the voluntary, unpaid cooperation of journalists. Thus, many relationships were permitted to remain intact.
    The Agency's unwillingness to end its use of journalists and its continued relationships with some news executives is largely the product of two basic facts of the intelligence game: journalistic cover is ideal because of the inquisitive nature of a reporter's job; and many other sources of institutional cover have been denied the CIA in recent years by businesses, foundations and educational institutions that once cooperated with the Agency.
    Published by Rolling Stone
    Unknown News note: The above article comes from the printed pages of an old copy of Rolling Stone. The text went through my eyeballs and came out of my fingers, but I didn't type every word that originally appeared in the article, just the parts that seemed pertinent. Omissions are indicated by ellipses (...). --HH
    This material is copyrighted by its original publisher.
    It is reprinted by Unknown News without permission, solely for purposes of criticism, comment, and news reporting, in accordance with the Fair Use Guidelines of copyright material under � 107 of U.S.C. Title 17.

    Wednesday, December 22, 2021

    WHO WAS THIS MAN? -- Miguel de Unamuno and his "EPILOGUE" (to Life and Writings of Dr. José Rizal de W.E. Retana)


    "For we wish to understand the spirit of an age to see into its heart and mind, and to acquire a feel for how those who lived in it responded to their world and coped with its dilemmas." - A. C. Grayling

    1. Colored and/or underlined words are HTML links. Click on them to see the linked posts/articles. Forwarding this and other posts to relatives and friends, especially those in the homeland, is greatly appreciated. To share, use all social media tools: email, blog, Google+, Tumblr, Twitter, Facebook, etc. THANKS!!
    2. Click the following underlined title/link to checkout these Essential/Primary Readings About Us Filipino Natives:
    Primary Blog Posts/Readings for my fellow, Native (Malay/Indio) Filipinos-in-the-Philippines
    3. Instantly translate to any of 71 foreign languages. Go to the sidebar on the right to choose your preferred language.
    4. The postings are oftentimes long and a few readers have claimed being "burnt out."  My apologies. The selected topics are not for entertainment but to stimulate deep, serious thoughts per my MISSION Statement and hopefully to rock our boat of ignorance, apathy, complacency, and hopefully lead to active citizenship.



    "The HISTORY of the past interests us only in so far as it illuminates the HISTORY of the present." Ernest Dimnet, 1866-1954, French Clergyman

    To be persuasive we must be believable; to be believable we must be credible; credible we must be truthful." - Edward R. Murrow (1908-1965)



    (For English translation, see the bottom/end of Spanish)


    Miguel de Unamuno


    (a Vida y Escritos del Dr. Jos√© Rizal de W.E. Retana)

    Acabo de leer por segunda vez la Vida y Escritos del Dr. Rizal, de W.E. Retana, y cierro su lectura con un tumulto de amargas reflexiones en mi esp√≠ritu, tumulto del que emerge una figura luminosa, la de Rizal. Un hombre henchido de destinos, un alma heroica, el √≠dolo hoy de un pueblo que ha de jugar un d√≠a, no me cabe duda de ello, un fecundo papel en la civilizaci√≥n humana.

    ¿Qui√©n era este hombre?

    El hombre

    Con un √≠ntimo inter√©s recorr√≠a yo en el libro de Retana aquel diario que Rizal llev√≥ en Madrid siendo estudiante. Bajo sus escuetas anotaciones palpita un alma so√Īadora tanto √≥ m√°s que en las amplificaciones ret√≥ricas de los personajes de ficci√≥n en que encarn√≥ m√°s tarde su esp√≠ritu tejido de esperanzas.

    Rizal estudi√≥ Filosof√≠a y Letras en Madrid por los mismos a√Īos en que estudiaba yo en la misma Facultad, aunque √©l estaba acab√°ndola cuando yo la empezaba. Deb√≠ de haber visto m√°s de una vez al tagalo en los vulgar√≠simos claustros de la Universidad Central, deb√≠ de haberme cruzado m√°s de una vez con √©l mientras so√Ī√°bamos Rizal en sus Filipinas y yo en mi Vasconia.

    En su diario no olvida hacer constar su asistencia √° la c√°tedra de griego, √° la que pareci√≥ aficionarse y en la que obtuvo la primera calificaci√≥n. No lo extra√Īo. Rizal no se aficion√≥ al griego precisamente, puedo asegurarlo: Rizal se aficion√≥ a D. L√°zaro Bard√≥n, nuestro venerable maestro, como me aficion√© yo. En el Noli me t√°ngere hay dos toques que proceden de D. L√°zaro. Uno de ellos es el traducir el principio del Gloria como Bard√≥n lo traduc√≠a: "Gloria √° Dios en las alturas; en la tierra, paz; entre los hombres, buena voluntad". Don L√°zaro fue uno de los cari√Īos de Rizal; lo aseguro yo que fui disc√≠pulo de D. L√°zaro y que he le√≠do el diario y las obras de Rizal.

    Y lo merec√≠a aquel nobil√≠simo y rudo maragato (1), aquella alma de ni√Īo, aquel santo var√≥n que fue D. L√°zaro, cura secularizado. ¡Si todos los espa√Īoles que conoci√≥ Rizal hubieran sido como D. L√°zaro...!

    En aquellos claustros de la Universidad Central debimos de cruzarnos, digo, el tagalo que so√Īaba en sus Filipinas, y yo, el vizca√≠no, que so√Īaba en mi Vasconia. Rom√°nticos ambos.

    Tiene raz√≥n Retana al decir que Rizal fue siempre un rom√°ntico, entendi√©ndose por esto un so√Īador, un idealista, un poeta en fin. S√≠, un rom√°ntico, como lo son todos los filipinos, seg√ļn el Sr. Taviel de Andrade.

    Ni fue toda su vida otra cosa que un so√Īador impenitente, un poeta. Y no precisamente en las composiciones r√≠tmicas en que trat√≥ de verter la poes√≠a de su alma, sino en sus obras todas, en su vida sobre todo.

    Am√≥ a su patria, Filipinas, con poes√≠a, con religiosidad. Hizo una religi√≥n de su patriotismo, y de esto hablar√© luego. Y am√≥ a Espa√Īa con poes√≠a, con religiosidad tambi√©n. Y esto hizo que le llevaran √° la muerte los que no saben quererla ni con poes√≠a ni con religi√≥n.

    "Quijote oriental" le llama una vez Retana, y está así bien llamado. Pero fue un Quijote doblado de un Hamlet; fue un Quijote del pensamiento, á quien le repugnaban las impurezas de la realidad.

    Sus haza√Īas fueron sus libros, sus escritos; su hero√≠smo fue el hero√≠smo del escritor.

    Pero enti√©ndase bien que no del escritor profesional, no del que piensa √≥ siente para escribir, sino del hombre henchido de amores que escribe porque ha pensado √≥ ha sentido. Y es muy grande la diferencia —sobre que llam√≥ la atenci√≥n Schopenhauer— de pensar para escribir √° escribir porque se ha pensado.

    Rizal era un poeta, un h√©roe del pensamiento y no de la acci√≥n sino en cuanto es acci√≥n el pensamiento, el verbo, que era ya en el principio, era con Dios y era Dios mismo, y por quien fueron hechas las cosas todas seg√ļn el Evangelio.

    Dice Retana que cuando, de vuelta Rizal √° Manila en 1892, se meti√≥ en pol√≠tica, fundando la Liga (2), el "m√≠stico lirista" se convirti√≥ en trabajador en prosa, y el pendant de Tolstoi en un pendant de Becerra (3). Quiz√°s con ello prest√≥ mayor servicio √° la causa filipina; pero su figura se amengua, a√Īade. Y el Sr. Santos (4) le sale al paso √° Retana con unas consideraciones que el lector puede leer en la nota (312), p√°gina 252 de la presente obra.

    Los h√©roes del pensamiento no son due√Īos de su acci√≥n; el viento del Esp√≠ritu les lleva adonde ellos no pensaban ir. Para dominar los actos externos de la propia vida, es muy conveniente una cierta pobreza imaginativa, y, por otra parte, los grandes valerosos del pensamiento, los esp√≠ritus arrojados en forjar ideas y apurarlas en sus consecuencias ideales y te√≥ricas, rara vez son hombres de voluntad en√©rgica para los actos externos de la vida. Galileo, tan heroico en el pensar, fue d√©bil ante el Santo Oficio. Y as√≠ es lo corriente y muy verdadera la psicolog√≠a del maestro de Le Desciple [sic], de Bourget. Est√ļdiese, si no, la vida de Spinoza, la de Kant, la de tantos otros pensadores heroicos.

    Rizal, el so√Īador valiente, me resulta una voluntad d√©bil √© irresoluta para la acci√≥n y la vida. Su retraimiento, su timidez, atestiguada cien veces, su vergonzosidad, no son m√°s que una forma de esa disposici√≥n hamletiana. Para haber sido un revolucionario pr√°ctico le habr√≠a hecho falta la mentalidad simple de un Andr√©s Bonifacio (5). Fue, creo, un vergonzoso y dubitativo.

    Y estos héroes anteriores, estos grandes conquistadores del mundo íntimo, cuando la acción les arrastra, aparecen héroes también, héroes por fuerza, de la acción. Leed sin prejuicio la vida de Lutero, de aquel gigante del corazón, que nunca pudo saber adónde le arrastraba su sino. Era un instrumento de la Providencia, como lo fue Rizal.

    Rizal previ√≥ su fin, su fin glorioso y tr√°gico; pero lo previ√≥ pasivamente, como el protagonista de una tragedia griega. No fue √° √©l, sino se sinti√≥ √° √©l arrastrado. Y pudo decir: ¡H√°gase, Se√Īor, tu voluntad y no la m√≠a!

    Es la historia misma de tantos hombres providenciales que cumplieron un destino sin hab√©rselo propuesto, y que, encerrados en s√≠, construyendo sus sue√Īos para d√°rselos √° los dem√°s como consuelo y esperanza, resultaron caudillos.

    Dice en alguna parte Retana que Rizal fue un místico. Admitámoslo. Sí, fue un místico, y como tantos místicos, desde su torre de estilita, con los ojos en el cielo y los brazos en alto, guió á su pueblo á la lucha y á la vida.

    Rizal fue un escritor, ó, digamos más bien, un hombre que escribía lo que pensaba y sentía. Y como escritor es como hizo su obra.

    El escritor

    En este libro se hallarán juicios de Rizal como escritor; en él se le examina como literato.

    Hay que hacer notar ante todo, y Retana no lo omite, que Rizal escribió sus obras en castellano, y que el castellano no era su lenguaje nativo materno, ó, por lo menos, que no era el lenguaje indígena y natural de su pueblo. El castellano es en Filipinas, como lo es en mi país vasco, un lenguaje adventicio y de reciente implantación, y supongo que hasta los que lo han tenido allí como idioma de cuna, como lengua en que recibieron las caricias de su madre y en que aprendieron á rezar, no han podido recibirlo con raíces.

    Juzgo por mí mismo. Yo aprendí a balbucir en castellano, y castellano se hablaba en mi casa, pero castellano de Bilbao, es decir, un castellano pobre y tímido, un castellano en mantillas, no pocas veces una mala traducción del vascuence. Y los que habiéndolo aprendido así tenemos luego que servirnos de él para expresar lo que hemos pensado y sentido, nos vemos forzados á remodelarlo, á hacernos con esfuerzo una lengua. Y esto, que es en cierto respecto nuestro flaco como escritores, es á la vez nuestro fuerte.

    Porque nuestra lengua no es un caput mortuum, no es algo que hemos recibido pasivamente, no es una rutina, sino que es algo vivo y palpitante, algo en que se ve nuestro forcejeo. Nuestras palabras son palabras vivas; resucitamos las muertas y animamos de nueva vida √° las que la ten√≠an l√°nguida. He√Īimos nuestra lengua, nuestra por derecho de conquista, con nuestro coraz√≥n y nuestro cerebro.

    Retana aplica a Rizal la tan conocida distinción entre lenguaje y estilo, y la clarísima doctrina de que se puede tener un estilo propio y fuerte ó amplio con un lenguaje defectuoso, y, por el contrario, ser correctísimo y atildadísimo en la dicción, careciendo en absoluto de estilo propio.

    La distinci√≥n se ha hecho mil veces; pero no llegan √° penetrar en ella estos b√°rbaros que piensan en castellano por herencia y rutina, y que andan √° vueltas con la gram√°tica y con el desali√Īo. Hay que dejarlos. Toda su miserable literatura se hundir√° en el olvido, y dentro de poco nadie se acordar√° de sus b√°rbaros remedos del lenguaje del siglo XVII √≥ XVI, nadie tendr√° en cuenta sus fatigadas y fatigosas vaciedades sonoras.

    El estilo de Rizal es, por lo com√ļn, blando, ondulante, sinuoso, sin rigideces ni esquinas, pecando, si de algo, de difuso. Es un estilo oratorio y es un estilo hamletiano, lleno de indecisiones en medio de la firmeza de pensamiento central, lleno de conceptuosidades. No es el estilo de un dogm√°tico.

    Verti√≥, como Plat√≥n, sus ideas en di√°logos, pues no otra cosa sino di√°logos sociol√≥gicos, y √° las veces filos√≥ficos, son sus novelas. Necesitaba de m√°s de un personaje para mostrar la multiplicidad de su esp√≠ritu. Dice Retana que Rizal es el Ibarra y no el El√≠as de Noli me t√°ngere, y yo creo que es uno y otro, y que lo es cuando se contradicen. Porque Rizal fue un esp√≠ritu de contradicciones, un alma que tem√≠a la revoluci√≥n, ansi√°ndola en lo √≠ntimo de s√≠; un hombre que confiaba y desconfiaba √° la vez en sus paisanos y hermanos de raza, que los cre√≠a los m√°s capaces y los menos capaces — los m√°s capaces cuando se miraba a s√≠, que era de su sangre, y los m√°s incapaces cuando miraba √° otros. —Rizal fue un hombre que oscil√≥ entre el temor y la esperanza, entre la fe y la desesperaci√≥n. Y todas estas contradicciones las un√≠a en un haz su amor ardiente, su amor po√©tico, su amor, hecho de ensue√Īos, √° su patria adorada, √° su regi√≥n del sol querida, perla del mar de Oriente, su perdido ed√©n (1*) (6).

    Este Quijote-Hamlet tagalo encontr√≥ en un afecto profund√≠simo, en una pasi√≥n verdaderamente religiosa —pues religioso fue, como dir√© m√°s adelante, su culto √° su patria, Filipinas—, el foco de sus contradicciones y el fin de su entusiasmo por la cultura. Quer√≠a la cultura; pero la quer√≠a para su pueblo, para redimirlo y ensalzarlo. Su tema constante fue el de hacer √° los filipinos cultos √© ilustrados, hacerlos hombres completos. Y le repugnaba la revoluci√≥n, porque tem√≠a que pusiera en peligro la obra de la cultura. Y, sin embargo de temerla, tal vez la deseaba √° su pesar.

    Rizal, alma profundamente religiosa, sent√≠a bien que la libertad no es un fin, sino un medio; que no basta que un hombre √≥ un pueblo quiera ser libre si no se forma una idea —un ideal m√°s bien— del empleo que de esa libertad ha de hacer luego.

    Rizal no era partidario de la independencia de Filipinas; esto resulta claro de sus escritos todos. Y no lo era por no creer √° su patria capacitada para la nacionalidad independiente, por estimar que necesitaba todav√≠a el patronato de Espa√Īa y que √©sta siguiera ampar√°ndola -√≥ que la amparara m√°s bien- hasta que llegase √° su edad de emancipaci√≥n. Pensamiento que vieron muy bien los que le persiguieron, aquellos desgraciados espa√Īoles que no se formaron jam√°s noci√≥n humana de lo que debe ser una metr√≥poli y que estimaron siempre las colonias como una finca, poblada de ind√≠genas √° modo de animales dom√©sticos, que hay que explotar.

    Y ¡c√≥mo la explotaban! ¡Con qu√© desprecio al espa√Īol filipino, al compatriota colonial! Este desprecio, m√°s bien que opresiones y vejaciones de otra clase, ese b√°rbaro y anticristiano desprecio lo llev√≥ siempre Rizal en su alma como una espina. Sinti√≥ en s√≠ todas las humillaciones de su raza. Fue un s√≠mbolo de √©sta.

    El tagalo

    Rizal fue, en efecto, un s√≠mbolo, en el sentido etimol√≥gico y primitivo de este vocablo; es decir, un compendio, un resumen de su raza. Y como todo hombre que llega √° simbolizar, √° compendiar un pueblo, uno de los pocos hombres representativos de la humanidad en general.

    Se comprende que Rizal sea hoy el ídolo, el santo de los malayos filipinos. Es un hombre que parece decirles: "Podéis llegar hasta mí; podéis ser lo que fui yo, pues que sois carne de mi carne y sangre de mi sangre."

    Dicen los protestantes unitarianos, es decir, aquellos que no admiten el dogma de la Trinidad ni el de la divinidad de Jesucristo, que el creer √° Jes√ļs un puro hombre y no m√°s que un hombre, un hombre como los dem√°s, aunque aqu√©l en quien se dio m√°s viva y m√°s clara la conciencia de la filialidad respecto √° Dios; que el creer esto es una creencia mucho m√°s piadosa y consoladora que la de creer al Cristo un Dios-hombre, la segunda persona de la Trinidad encarnada, porque, si Cristo fue hombre, cabe que lleguemos los dem√°s hombres adonde √©l lleg√≥; pero, si fue un Dios, se nos hace imposible el igualarle.

    Y he le√≠do en un escrito mejicano que la vida y la obra del gran indio Benito Ju√°rez ha sido un ejemplo y una redenci√≥n para muchos indios mejicanos, que han visto √° uno de los suyos, de pura sangre americana, llegar √° encarnar en un momento √° la patria, ser su conciencia viva y llevar en su alma estoica y religiosa —religiosamente estoica— los destinos de ella. Muchos de los blancos y de los mestizos que rodeaban √° Ju√°rez podr√≠an haber tenido, y tuvieron algunos, m√°s inteligencia y m√°s ilustraci√≥n que √©l; pero ninguno tuvo un coraz√≥n tan bien templado y un sentimiento tan profundo y tan religioso de la patria como aquel abogado ind√≠gena, de pura sangre americana, que no aprendi√≥ el castellano sino ya talludito, y que, al perder la fe en los dogmas cat√≥licos en que su pariente el cura le educara, traslad√≥ esa fe √° los principios de derecho que aprendi√≥ en las aulas para aplicarlos √° su patria, M√©jico, sentida como un poder divino.

    En las aulas tambi√©n es donde Rizal cobr√≥ su conciencia de tagalo; en las aulas, en que le aleccionaron blancos incomprensivos, desde√Īosos y arrogantes. Es √©l mismo quien en el cap√≠tulo XIV, "Una casa de estudiantes", de su novela El Filibusterismo, nos dice: "Las barreras que la pol√≠tica establece entre las razas desaparecen en las aulas como derretidas al calor de la ciencia y de la juventud." Y es lo que anhel√≥ para su patria: ciencia y juventud —juventud, no ni√Īez— que derritieran las barreras entre las razas.

    Estas barreras, y m√°s a√ļn que las legales las establecidas por las costumbres, atormentaban el alma generosa de Rizal. La conciencia de su propia raza, conciencia que deb√≠a √° su superioridad personal, fecundada por la educaci√≥n, esa conciencia lo fue de dolor. Con hondo, con hond√≠simo sentido po√©tico pudo llamar √° Filipinas en su √ļltimo canto, el de despedida: ¡Mi patria idolatrada, dolor de mis dolores! S√≠, su patria fue su conciencia, porque en √©l cobr√≥ Filipinas conciencia de s√≠, y en √©l, Cristo de ella, se redimi√≥ sufriendo.

    Rizal tuvo que sufrir la petulante brutalidad del blanco, para la cual no hay m√°s palabra que una palabra griega: authad√≠a. La cual significa la complacencia que uno siente de s√≠ mismo, la satisfacci√≥n de ser quien es, el recrearse en s√≠ propio, y luego, en sentido corriente, arrogancia, insolencia. Y esto es el blanco: arrogante, insolente, auth√°dico. Y arrogante por incomprensi√≥n del alma de los dem√°s, por asimpat√≠a, es decir, por incapacidad de entrar en las almas de los otros y ver y sentir el mundo como ellos lo ven y lo sienten.

    Sería curiosísimo hacer una revista de todas las tonterías y todos los desatinos que hemos inventado los hombres de la raza blanca ó caucásica para fundamentar nuestra pretensión á la superioridad nativa y originaria sobre las demás razas. Aquí entrarían desde fantasías bíblicas hasta fantasías pseudo-darwinianas, sin olvidar lo del dólico-rubio y otras ridiculeces análogas. Cualidad que nos distingue es un privilegio ó una ventaja, aquella de que carecemos es un defecto. Y cuando nos encontramos con un caso como el reciente del Japón, no sabemos por dónde salir.

    Rizal tuvo esta preocupaci√≥n etnol√≥gica, y en las p√°ginas 137 y 138 de este libro puede leerse sus conclusiones √° tal respecto (7). Y en diferentes ocasiones, sobre todo en sus anotaciones al libro Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas, del Dr. Antonio de Morga, puede verse c√≥mo trat√≥ de sincerar √° sus paisanos de los cargos que el blanco les hac√≠a.

    En la p√°g. 23 de este libro habr√° visto el lector lo que el Prof. Blumentritt (8) cuenta respecto √° que Rizal ya desde peque√Īo se encontraba grandemente resentido por verse tratado por los espa√Īoles con cierto menosprecio, s√≥lo por ser indio. Las manifestaciones de Blumentritt al respecto no tienen desperdicio.

    Para casi todos los espa√Īoles que han pasado por Filipinas, el indio es un peque√Īo ni√Īo que jam√°s llega √° la mayor edad. Recordemos que los graves sacerdotes egipcios consideraban √° los griegos como unos ni√Īos, y reflexi√≥nese en si nuestros espa√Īoles no hac√≠an all√≠, √° lo sumo, el papel de egipcios de la decadencia entre griegos incipientes, griegos en la infancia social.

    Otros hablan del servilismo del indio, y √° este respecto s√≥lo me ocurre considerar lo que pasa aqu√≠, en la Pen√≠nsula, en que se considera como los m√°s serviles √° los nativos de cierta regi√≥n, siendo √©stos los que tienen acaso m√°s desarrollado el sentimiento de la libertad y la dignidad interiores. Un barrendero con su escoba por las calles, un aguador con su cuba, puede tener y suele tener m√°s fino sentimiento de su dignidad y su independencia que el hidalgo hambr√≥n que le desde√Īa y anda solicitando empleos √≥ mercedes. El servilismo suele vestirse aqu√≠ con arrogante ropilla de hidalgo, y el mendigo insolente que llevamos dentro se emboza en su arrogancia. Nuestra literatura picaresca nos dice mucho al respecto.

    Rizal ten√≠a un fino sentido de las jerarqu√≠as sociales, no olvidaba jam√°s el tratamiento que √° cada uno se le deb√≠a. Es interesant√≠simo lo que cuenta Retana de que en las recepciones oficiales en Dapitan (9) saludaba √° los presentes por orden de jerarqu√≠a; pero en las reuniones familiares, primero lo hac√≠a √° las se√Īoras, aun siendo indias. Esto, que es un rasgo √° la japonesa, no eran capaces de apreciarlo en todo su valor los oficiales insolentes con sus subordinados y rastreros con sus superiores, √≥ los frailes zafios, hartos de borona √≥ de centeno en su tierra, que tuteaban √° todo indio.

    "Aqu√≠ viene lo m√°s perdido de la Pen√≠nsula, y si llega uno bueno, pronto le corrompe el pa√≠s", dice un personaje de Noli me t√°ngere. No discutir√© la mayor √≥ menor exactitud de esa afirmaci√≥n —afirmaci√≥n que, por injusta que sea, se ha formulado mil veces en Espa√Īa; —pero ¡qu√© espa√Īoles debi√≥ de conocer Rizal en Filipinas! Y, sobre todo, ¡qu√© frailes! Porque los frailes se reclutan aqu√≠, por lo general, entre las clases m√°s incultas, entre las m√°s zafias y m√°s r√ļsticas. Dejan la esteva √≥ la laya para entrar en un convento; les atusan all√≠ el pelo de la dehesa con lat√≠n b√°rbaro y escol√°stica indigesta, y se encuentran luego tan r√ļsticos √© incultos como cuando entraron, convertidos en padres y objeto de la veneraci√≥n y el respeto de no pocas gentes. ¿No ha de desarroll√°rseles la authadia, la soberbia gratuita? Trasl√°desele √° un hombre en estas condiciones √° un pa√≠s como Filipinas; p√≥ngasele entre sencillos indios t√≠midos, ignorantes y fanatizados, y d√≠gase lo que tiene que resultar.

    En cierta ocasi√≥n no pude resistir las insolencias petulantes de un escoc√©s, y encar√°ndome con √©l le dije: "Antes de pasar adelante perm√≠tame una observaci√≥n: Usted reconocer√° conmigo que, por ser Inglaterra tomada en conjunto y como naci√≥n m√°s adelantada y culta que Portugal √≥ Albania, no puede tolerarse que el m√°s bruto y el m√°s inculto de los ingleses se crea superior al m√°s inteligente y culto de los portugueses √≥ albaneses, ¿no es as√≠?" Y como el hombre asintiera, conclu√≠: "Pues bien: usted figura en Inglaterra, por las pruebas que hoy est√° dando, en lo m√°s bajo de la escala de cultura, y yo en Espa√Īa, lo digo con la modestia que me caracteriza, en lo m√°s alto de ella; de modo que hemos conclu√≠do, porque de m√≠ a usted hay m√°s distancia que Espa√Īa √° Inglaterra, s√≥lo que en orden inverso." Y esto creo que pudieron decir no pocos indios y mesticillos vulgares (10) √° los graves y cogolludos padres que los desde√Īaban.

    L√©ase en la p√°gina 35 de este libro c√≥mo Rizal estuvo en 1880 por primera vez en el palacio de Malaca√Īang (11) por haber sido atropellado y herido en una noche oscura por la Guardia civil, porque pas√≥ delante de un bulto y no salud√≥, y el bulto result√≥ ser el teniente que mandaba el destacamento. Y relaci√≥nese este suceso con la traducci√≥n que hizo Rizal m√°s tarde al tagalo del drama Guillermo Tell, de Schiller, en que se apresa √° Tell por no haber saludado al bast√≥n √° que coronaba el sombrero del tirano Gessler.

    Todas estas humillaciones her√≠an aquella alma sensible y delicad√≠sima del poeta; no pod√≠a sufrir las brutalidades del blanco y zafio y nada so√Īador, de los Sansones Carrascos que por all√° ca√≠an, de aquellos duros espa√Īoles he√Īidos con garbanzo √≥ con borona.

    Y todo el sue√Īo de Rizal fue redimir, emancipar el alma, no el cuerpo de su patria. ¡Todo por Filipinas! Escrib√≠a al P. Pastells, jesu√≠ta, √° prop√≥sito de la causa √° cuya defensa dedic√≥ sus talentos: "La ca√Īa, al nacer en este suelo, viene para sostener chozas de nipa y no las pesadas moles de los edificios de Europa." Pensamiento delicad√≠simo, cuyo alcance todo dudo mucho que comprendiera el P. Pastellas ni ning√ļn otro jesu√≠ta espa√Īol. Y √©stos eran all√≠ de lo mejorcito...

    Rizal no pens√≥ nunca sino en Filipinas; pero tampoco Jes√ļs quiso salir nunca de Judea, y dijo √° la cananea que hab√≠a sido enviado para las ovejas perdidas del reino de Israel tan s√≥lo. Y de aquel rinc√≥n del mundo, en el que naci√≥ y muri√≥, irradi√≥ su doctrina √° todo el orbe.

    Rizal, la conciencia viva filipina, so√Ī√≥ una antigua civilizaci√≥n tagala. Es un espejismo natural; es el espejismo que ha producido la leyenda del Para√≠so. Lo mismo ha pasado en mi tierra vasca, donde tambi√©n se so√Ī√≥ en una antigua civilizaci√≥n euscalduna, en un patriarca Aitor y en toda una fant√°stica prehistoria dibujada en nubes. Hasta han llegado √° decir que nuestros remotos abuelos adoraron la cruz antes de la venida de Cristo. Pura poes√≠a.

    En esta poes√≠a mec√≠ yo los ensue√Īos de mi adolescencia, y en ella los meci√≥ aquel hombre singular, todo poeta, que se llam√≥ Sabino Arana, y para el cual no ha llegado a√ļn la hora del completo reconocimiento. En Madrid, ese h√≥rrido Madrid, en cuyas clases voceras se cifra y compendia toda la incomprensi√≥n espa√Īola, se le tom√≥ a broma √≥ √° rabia, se le desde√Ī√≥ sin conocerle √≥ se le insult√≥. Ninguno de los desdichados folicularios que sobre √©l esciribieron algo conoc√≠a su obra, y menos su esp√≠ritu.

    Y saco √° colaci√≥n √° Sabino Arana, alma ardiente y po√©tica y so√Īadora, porque tiene un √≠ntimo parentesco con Rizal, y como Rizal muri√≥ incomprendido por los suyos y por los otros. Y como Rizal filibustero, filibustero √≥ algo parecido fue llamado Arana.

    Parecíanse hasta en detalles que se muestran nimios y que son, sin embargo, altamente significativos. Si no temiera alargar demasiado este ensayo, diría lo que creo significa el que Arana emprendiese la reforma de la ortografía eusquérica ó del vascuence y Rizal la del tagalo.

    Y este indio fue educado por Espa√Īa y Espa√Īa le hizo espa√Īol.

    El espa√Īol

    Espa√Īol, s√≠, profunda √© √≠ntimamente espa√Īol, mucho m√°s espa√Īol que aquellos desgraciados —¡perd√≥nalos, Se√Īor, porque no supieron lo que se hac√≠an!— que sobre su cad√°ver, a√ļn caliente, lanzaron como un insulto al cielo, aquel sacr√≠lego ¡viva Espa√Īa!

    Espa√Īol, s√≠.

    En lengua espa√Īola pens√≥, y en lengua espa√Īola dio √° sus hermanos sus ense√Īanzas; en lengua espa√Īola cant√≥ su √ļltimo y tiern√≠simo adi√≥s √° su patria, y este canto durar√° cuanto la lengua espa√Īola durare; en lengua espa√Īola dej√≥ escrita para siempre la Biblia de Filipinas.

    "¿A qu√© ven√≠s ahora con vuestra ense√Īanza del castellano —dice Simoun en El Filibusterismo—, pretensi√≥n que ser√≠a rid√≠cula si no fuese de consecuencias deplorables? ¡Quer√©is a√Īadir un idioma m√°s √° los cuarenta y tantos que se hablan en las islas para entenderos cada vez menos!...

    "Al contrario, repuso Basilio; si el conocimiento del castellano nos puede unir al Gobierno, en cambio puede unir también á todas las islas entre sí!"

    Y este es el punto de vista sólido.

    Cuando los romanos llegaron √° Espa√Īa, deb√≠an de hablarse aqu√≠ tantas lenguas por lo menos como en Filipinas cuando all√≠ arrib√≥ mi paisano Legazpi. El lat√≠n result√≥ una manera de entenderse los pueblos todos espa√Īoles entre s√≠, y el lat√≠n nos unific√≥, y el lat√≠n hizo la Patria. Y pudiera muy bien ser que el castellano, el espa√Īol, y no el tagalo, haga la unidad espiritual de Filipinas.

    En reciente carta que desde Manila me escribe el docto y culto filipino D. Felipe G. Calderón me dice: "Por un contrasentido que para V. tal vez no tenga explicación y que para nosotros es perfectamente explicable, me complazco en decirle que hoy se habla (aquí) más castellano que nunca, y la razón es bien clara, si se considera que actualmente han aumentado los establecimientos docentes, sobre la base del castellano; hay mayor movimiento de libros y de periódicos, ya que ha desaparecido la censura previa, y la mano férrea del fraile obstruía todo conato, toda tentativa de estudiar castellano.

    "Usted que ha le√≠do el Noli me t√°ngere puede apreciar cu√°l era la labor obstruccionista del fraile contra el castellano, por el cap√≠tulo "Aventuras de un maestro de escuela"; y la famosa Academia de castellano de que se habla en El Filibusterismo es una realidad en que tom√© parte activa y el entonces Director de Administraci√≥n civil, D. Benigno Quiroga Ballesteros.

    "Las escuelas p√ļblicas est√°n aqu√≠ organizadas sobre la base del ingl√©s; pero su resultado no es tan lisonjero para dicha lengua, pues aun los estudiantes en las escuelas oficiales cultivan paralelamente el ingl√©s y el castellano, ya que √©ste es la lengua social, como el ingl√©s es el oficial y el dialecto de cada localidad la del hogar.

    "Para probarle a V. el poco √©xito que alcanza el ingl√©s, b√°stele el dato siguiente: Por el C√≥digo civil de Procedimientos promulgado en 1901 se dispuso que desde este a√Īo se hablar√≠a el ingl√©s en los tribunales de justicia; pero en vista de que ni los jueces filipinos, ni los abogados, ni siquiera los magistrados de la Corte Suprema estaban en condiciones de aceptar tal reforma, se ha tenido que dictar una ley prorrogando por diez a√Īos m√°s el uso del castellano en los tribunales de justicia (12).

    "Consecuencia de semejante ley es que el pueblo filipino haya visto que sin el inglés también se puede vivir y no se hagan esfuerzos, como en un principio, por aprender el idioma."

    El castellano, la lengua de Rizal, es la lengua social de Filipinas. ¿No se debe √° Rizal m√°s que √° otro cualquiera de los hombres la conservaci√≥n en Filipinas de esta lengua, en que va lo mejor, lo m√°s puro de nuestro esp√≠ritu? ¡Instructivo destino el de nuestra Espa√Īa! Empieza √° ser de veras querida y respetada cuando deja de dominar. En todas las que fueron sus colonias se le quiere m√°s y mejor cuando ya de ella no dependen. Se le hace justicia luego que se sacude su yugo. As√≠ ha pasado en Cuba, as√≠ en la Am√©rica espa√Īola toda, as√≠ en Filipinas. ¿Es que hay dos Espa√Īas?

    Como los que leen este ensayo han le√≠do antes el libro de Retana, resulta in√ļtil tratar de probarles que Rizal quer√≠a √° Espa√Īa como √° su nodriza espiritual, como √° su maestra, como √° la nodriza espiritual de Filipinas, su patria. La quer√≠a con cari√Īo inteligente y cordial, y no con el ciego y brutal ego√≠sta instinto de aquellos desgraciados que lanzaron el sacr√≠lego viva sobre el cad√°ver del gran tagalo.

    Rizal vivi√≥ y se educ√≥ en Espa√Īa, y pudo conocer otros espa√Īoles que los frailes y los empleados de la colonia.

    Los juicios todos de Rizal sobre Espa√Īa, son de una moderaci√≥n, de una serenidad, de una simpat√≠a honda, de un afecto que s√≥lo pod√≠an escapar √° los b√°rbaros que pretenden, tranca en mano, hacernos lanzar un ¡viva Espa√Īa! sin contenido alguno y que brote, no del cerebro ni del coraz√≥n, sino del otro √≥rgano, de donde le salen al b√°rbaro las voliciones en√©rgicas. No pod√≠an comprender el espa√Īolismo de Rizal esos pobres inconcientes que sienten fr√≠o por la espalda cuando ven tremolar la bandera roja y gualda. (Y esto porque gualda y espada son consonantes.)

    Es in√ļtil insistir en esto.

    Dice Retana: "Tan espa√Īol era, que de tanto serlo se derivaba aquel su orgullo personal imponderable, sin l√≠mites; √©l no quer√≠a ser menos espa√Īol que el que m√°s lo fuese. Por eso precisamente, por ser tan espa√Īol, se le juzgaba "filibustero"."

    El filibustero

    Ya tenemos aqu√≠ el mote, el chibolete (2* ).

    Oigamos √° Rizal mismo lo que nos dice en el cap√≠tulo XXXV, "Comentarios", de su Noli me t√°ngere:

    "Los padres blancos han llamado √° D. Crisostomo (13) plibastero. Es nombre peor que tarantado (atolondrado) y saragata (14), peor que betelapora, peor que escupir en la hostia en Viernes Santo. Ya os acord√°is de la palabra ispichoso, que bastaba aplicar √° un hombre para que los civiles de Villa Abrille se le llevasen al desierto √≥ √° la c√°rcel; pues plibastiero [sic]es peor. Seg√ļn dec√≠an el telegrafista y el directorcillo, plibastiero dicho por un cristiano, un cura √≥ un espa√Īol √° otro cristiano como nosotros, parece santus deus con requimiternam; si te llaman un vez plibastiero, ya puedes confesarte y pagar tus deudas, pues no te queda m√°s remedio que dejarte ahorcar."

    ¡Qu√© precioso pasaje! ¡Cu√°n al vivo se nos muestra en √©l ese terrible poder√≠o que ejercen las palabras donde las ideas son miserables √≥ andan ausentes! Ese terrible plibastero √≥ filibustero, lo mismo que hoy el mote de separatista, era un chibolete (15), una mera palabra tan vac√≠a de contenido como el vac√≠o ¡viva Espa√Īa! con que se quer√≠a y se quiere rellenar la inanidad de prop√≥sitos.

    Tiene raz√≥n Retana; "si los enemigos de Rizal hubiesen visto el dibujo que √©ste hizo de su casa de Calamba, y que mand√≥ al profesor Blumentritt, habr√≠an dicho que el dibujo ¡era tambi√©n filibustero!" (p√°gina 145). Y tiene raz√≥n al a√Īadir que las doctrinas de Rizal respecto √° Filipinas no iban m√°s all√° que van respecto √° Catalu√Īa √≥ √° Vasconia las de muchos catalanes y vascongados √° quien se les deja, por hoy al menos, vivir tranquilos.

    Fueron los espa√Īoles, hay que decirlo muy alto, fueron sobre todo los frailes —los zafios √© incomprensivos frailes— los que estuvieron empujando √° Rizal al separatismo. Y las cosas se repiten hoy, y son los dem√°s espa√Īoles los que se empe√Īan en impulsarnos √° catalanes y vascos al separatismo.

    Oigamos lo que dice en el cap√≠tulo LXI de Noli me t√°ngere un personaje de Rizal, es decir, uno de los varios hombres que en Rizal hab√≠a. Dice:

    "¡Ellos me han abierto los ojos, me han hecho ver la llaga y me fuerzan √° ser criminal! Y pues que lo han querido, ser√© filibustero, pero verdadero filibustero; llamar√© √° todos los desgraciados... Nosotros, durante tres siglos, les tendemos la mano, les pedimos amor, ansiamos llamarlos nuestros hermanos; ¿c√≥mo nos contestan? Con el insulto y la burla, neg√°ndonos hasta la cualidad de seres humanos."

    Y así llegó Bonifacio, el bodeguero, el no intelectual, é hizo la revolución.

    ¡Filibustero! Volved √° leer en la p√°gina 262 de este libro lo que la prensa de la Metr√≥poli, esta miserable √© incomprensiva prensa, una de las principales causantes de nuestro desastre, dijo de Rizal. Lo mismo que dijo de Arana.

    Tiene raz√≥n Retana al decir que el ideal separatista mismo es l√≠cito, como ideal, en la Pen√≠nsula. Se puede discutir la Patria; es m√°s, debe discut√≠rsela. S√≥lo discuti√©ndola llegaremos a comprenderla, √° tener conciencia de ella. Nuestra desgracia es que Espa√Īa no significa hoy nada para la inmensa mayor√≠a de los espa√Īoles, y una naci√≥n, lo mismo que un individuo, languidece y acaba por perecer si no tiene m√°s resorte de vida que el mero instinto de conservaci√≥n.

    La Espa√Īa del ¡viva Espa√Īa! sacr√≠lego que se lanz√≥ sobre el cad√°ver de Rizal es la Espa√Īa de los explotadores, los brutos y los imb√©ciles; la Espa√Īa de los tiranuelos y de sus esclavos; la Espa√Īa de los caciques y los due√Īos de grandes latifundios; la Espa√Īa de los que s√≥lo viven del presupuesto sin ideal alguno.

    Rizal quiso dar contenido √° Espa√Īa en Filipinas, y como para llenar ese contenido sobraban frailes y brutos, √° Rizal se le acus√≥ de filibustero.

    En la trist√≠sima acusaci√≥n fiscal contra el gran espa√Īol y gran tagalo —de ella tratar√© en seguida— se dec√≠a que √° Espa√Īa le sobraban alientos y energ√≠as para no tolerar que el pabell√≥n espa√Īol dejase de flotar en aquellas regiones descubiertas y conquistadas por la intrepidez y el arrojo de nuestros antepasados; y √° estas frases, de detestable y perniciosa ret√≥rica, les pone Retana un comentario muy justo. Las Islas Filipinas, en efecto, no fueron conquistadas con arrojo y con intrepidez, sino que fueron ganadas por medio de la persuasi√≥n y pactos con los r√©gulos ind√≠genas, sin que apenas se derramara la sangre. "El general en jefe de la conquista —a√Īade Retana— llam√≥se Miguel L√≥pez de Legazpi, un bondadoso y viejo escribano que en los d√≠as de su vida desenvain√≥ la tizona."

    S√≠; las Filipinas las gan√≥ para Espa√Īa mi paisano Legazpi —uno de los hombres m√°s representativos de mi raza vasca, como lo fue tambi√©n muy representativo de ella, la suya y la m√≠a, Urdaneta (16)—; y las gan√≥ con el cerebro y no con el otro √≥rgano de donde han sacado sus determinaciones no pocos de los conquistadores √° lo Pizarro, de espada y tranca.

    As√≠, con el cerebro, las gan√≥ Legazpi, el bondadoso escribano vasco. Y ¿c√≥mo se perdieron? Vamos √° verlo.

    Veamos el proceso de Rizal.

    El proceso

    Al llegar √° esta parte de mi trabajo me invade una gran tristeza, y √° la vez la conciencia de la gravedad de cuanto tengo que decir. Los hechos que voy √° juzgar pertenecen ya √° la Historia, aunque vivos los m√°s de los actores que en ellos intervinieron. Para todos personalmente quiero las mayores consideraciones. Dios y Espa√Īa les perdonar√°n lo que hicieron, en atenci√≥n √° que lo hicieron sin saber lo que se hac√≠an y obrando, no como individuos concientes de s√≠ mismos y aut√≥nomos, sino como miembros de una colectividad, de una corporaci√≥n enloquecida por el miedo. El miedo y s√≥lo el miedo, el degradante sentimiento del miedo, el miedo y s√≥lo el miedo fue el inspirador del Tribunal militar que conden√≥ √° Rizal.

    Dice Retana hablando del fusilamiento de Rizal que, "afortunadamente, √° Espa√Īa no le alcanza la responsabilidad de los errores cometidos por algunos de sus hijos" (p√°g. 188). Siento discrepar aqu√≠ de Retana. Creo, en efecto, que desgraciadamente le alcanza √° Espa√Īa responsabilidad en aquel crimen; creo m√°s, y lo digo como lo creo: creo que fue Espa√Īa quien fusil√≥ √° Rizal. Y le fusil√≥ por miedo.

    Por miedo, s√≠. Hace tiempo que todos los errores p√ļblicos, que todos los cr√≠menes p√ļblicos que se cometen en Espa√Īa, se cometen por miedo; hace tiempo que sus corporaciones √© institutos todos, empezando por el Ej√©rcito, no obran sino bajo la presi√≥n del miedo. Todos temen ser discutidos, y para evitarlo pegan cuando pueden pegar. Y pegan por el miedo. Por miedo se fusil√≥ a Rizal, como por miedo pidi√≥ el Ej√©rcito la aborrecible y absurda ley de Jurisdicciones, y por miedo se la vot√≥ el Parlamento.

    El escrito de acusaci√≥n del se√Īor teniente fiscal D. Enrique de Alcocer y R. De Vaamonde es, como el dictamen del auditor general D. Nicol√°s de la Pe√Īa, una cosa vergonzosa y deplorable. Es decir, lo ser√≠an si estos se√Īores hubiesen obrado por s√≠ y ante s√≠, auton√≥micamente, y no como pedazos de un instituto y de una sociedad sobrecojidos por el miedo. Retana ha desmenuzado la horrenda y desatinada acusaci√≥n del Sr. Alcocer.

    En el fondo de todo ello no se ve m√°s que el miedo y el odio √° la inteligencia, miedo y odio muy naturales en el instituto √° que los se√Īores Alcocer y Pe√Īa pertenec√≠an. Dice Retana que fusilar √° Rizal por los motivos por que le fusilaron, es como si en Rusia se intentase fusilar √° Tolstoi. Creo que buenas ganas se les pasan de ello √° no pocos. Yo s√© que cuando se sustanciaba en Barcelona, hace ya a√Īos, el proceso por el b√°rbaro atentado del Liceo, el Juez militar que actuaba en √©l y ten√≠a la colecci√≥n de una revista en que colaboramos mi compa√Īero de claustro el Sr. Dorado Montero, prestigios√≠simo criminalista, y yo, se dej√≥ decir: "A estos, √° estos dos se√Īores catedr√°ticos quisiera yo atraparlos y ver√≠an lo que es bueno." Si hubiera sido en Filipinas, √° estas horas mi compa√Īero el Sr. Dorado Montero y yo dormir√≠amos el eterno sue√Īo de los m√°rtires del pensamiento.

    Lo más terrible de la jurisdicción militar es que no sabe enjuiciar; es que la educación que reciben los militares es la más opuesta á la que necesita quien ha de tener oficio de juzgar. Pecan, no por mala intención, sino por torpeza, por incapacidad. Y pecan unas veces por carta de más y otras por carta de menos.

    En una corporación cualquiera, y muy en especial en el Ejército, la inteligencia individual y la independencia de juicio llegan á considerarse como un peligro. El que manda más es el que tiene más razón. La disciplina exige someter el criterio personal á la jerarquía. Sólo á este precio se robustece el instituto. Y así en el Ejército, y, lo que es más, hasta en el Profesorado en cuanto Cuerpo, siendo como es su misión difundir la cultura, se mira con recelo y hasta se odia calladamente á la inteligencia individual. Sabidas son las conminaciones de los Santos Padres á ella; sabido es cuanto han dicho de los que se creen sabios. La inteligencia, se dice, lleva á la soberbia; hay que someter el juicio propio.

    Y esto, que es natural y es disculpable, pues arranca de un principio de vida de toda corporaci√≥n √≥ instituto, esto se agrava cuando estos institutos se encuentran en forma de desarrollo rudimentario. Cuanto menos perfecta es una corporaci√≥n, tanto mayor es el miedo y el odio √° la inteligencia que en ella se desarrolla. Y nuestro ej√©rcito, como ej√©rcito —lo mismo que nuestro clero, como clero, y nuestro profesorado, como profesorado— se encuentra en un estado muy rudimentario de desarrollo. Su inteligencia colectiva es inferior al promedio de las inteligencias individuales que la componen, con no ser este promedio, como no lo es en Espa√Īa, muy elevado. Pero esa su inteligencia colectiva rudimentaria tiene cierta conciencia, aunque oscura, de su rudimentariedad, y trata de defenderse contra las inteligencias individuales corrosivas. Dudo que haya ej√©rcito en que se abrigue m√°s indiferencia, cuando no desd√©n, respecto √° las inteligencias individuales que dentro de √©l hay, como en el nuestro, y duda que haya otro en que se rinda tanto culto al arrojo ciego, al coraje instintivo. Son legi√≥n los militares espa√Īoles que contestar√≠an lo que se dice contest√≥ Prim √° un general extranjero que le preguntaba c√≥mo se hacen las guerrillas; son legi√≥n los que, √° pesar de las lecciones presenciadas y no recibidas, siguen creyendo que la guerra no se hace con el cerebro principalmente, sino con lo otro. Y lo otro no es tampoco el valor. Porque el valor tiene m√°s de cerebral que de testicular. Y en todo caso es cordial.

    Y enti√©ndase bien que esto que digo de nuestro ej√©rcito lo aplico mutatis mutandis √° las dem√°s instituciones, empezando por aquella √° que pertenezco.

    Es —se me dira— que en el proceso de Rizal anduvieron auditores de guerra, verdaderos letrados! El letrado que ingresa en la milicia, para formar parte del Cuerpo jur√≠dico militar, lo mismo que los dem√°s auxiliares, se asimilan el esp√≠ritu general del Cuerpo. El uniforme, estrecho y r√≠gido, puede en ellos m√°s que la amplia toga.

    Desde el d√≠a mismo en que se le pone quilla √° un buque de guerra en el astillero tiene ya su dotaci√≥n completa, y all√≠ el comandante manda m√°s que el ingeniero naval. Me dec√≠a un m√©dico de la Armada en cierta ocasi√≥n: "¿Usted creer√° que al entrar un buque en fuego y tener que jugar la artiller√≠a, la maniobra estar√° supeditada √° lo que el oficial de artiller√≠a ordene? Pues no, se√Īor; all√≠ manda el comandante. Y si no se les ocurre curar √° los heridos √≥ decir misa, es porque desde√Īan estas funciones."

    Y as√≠ en todo en la milicia. Los combatientes, aquellos cuya funci√≥n propia es pelear, desde√Īan √° los Cuerpos auxiliares; pero √©stos, los auxiliares, tratan siempre de asimilarse √° aqu√©llos, aunque acaso tambi√©n desde√Ī√°ndolos. Aquello del desd√©n con el desd√©n es una f√≥rmula genuinamente espa√Īola (17).

    Los letrados que intervinieron en el proceso de Rizal lo hicieron como militares, y como militares, influídos por aquellos desdichados frailes y sus similares, dominados por el miedo.

    A la luz de estas consideraciones doloros√≠simas hay que leer la vergonzosa acusaci√≥n contra Rizal, y el dictamen y el informe. Cierto es que la defensa del Sr. Taviel de Andrade es un documento de serenidad y de juicio; pero ¡qu√© obligada timidez en ella! Hay, de todos modos, que salvar al defensor; el miedo no hizo en √©l tanta presa.

    El pobre auditor Sr. Pe√Īa se meti√≥ √° juzgar de la capacidad intelectual del acusado, y esto me recuerda las tonter√≠as del magistrado que al absolver la Madame Bovary, de Flaubert, se meti√≥ √° juzgar de su m√©rito literario, lo que le vali√≥ aquel soberano ramalazo del gran novelista, que no pod√≠a consentir que un magistrado vulgar se metiese √° criticar desde su sitial de administrar justicia.

    Es natural que en el ambiente de miedo que se respiraba en Manila en los días del proceso de Rizal fuera difícil evadirse del contagio. Hay que leer en este libro cómo los que se llamaban ministros de Cristo predicaban el exterminio. Es su costumbre; quieren meter la fe, ó lo que sea, en las cabezas de los demás rompiéndoselas á cristazos.

    Repito que fue Espa√Īa la que fusil√≥ √° Rizal. Y si se me dijese que aqu√≠ no se fusila ya por ideas y que aqu√≠ no se habr√≠a fusilado √° Rizal, contestar√© que es cierto, pero es porque aqu√≠ estamos m√°s cerca de Europa. Y Europa, adem√°s, cuando se trata de atropellos que una naci√≥n comete en sus colonias, se encoge de hombros, pues ¿cu√°l de sus naciones est√° libre de esta culpa? La √©tica de una naci√≥n europea es doble y cambia cuando se trata de colonias (18).

    Y todo ello lo sancion√≥ el general Polavieja, cuya mentalidad correspond√≠a, seg√ļn mis informes, por lo rudimentaria, √° lo rudimentario de la inteligencia colectiva que bajo la presi√≥n del miedo dict√≥ aquel fallo.

    Rizal fue condenado √° muerte; pero a√ļn faltaba otro acto, y es el de la conversi√≥n. La espada cumpli√≥ su oficio —un oficio para el que no sirve la espada—; faltaba el hisopo cumplir el suyo, un oficio tambi√©n para el que no sirve el hisopo.

    Veamos la conversi√≥n (19).

    La conversión

    Rizal, educado en el catolicismo, no llegó a ser nunca en rigor un librepensador, sino un librecreyente. A los jesuitas que le visitaron cuando estaba en capilla les pareció un protestante, y de protestante ó simpatizador del protestantismo, así como de germanófilo fue tratado más de una vez.

    Entre nosotros, los espa√Īoles, apenas hay idea de lo que el protestantismo es y significa, y el clero cat√≥lico espa√Īol es de lo m√°s ignorante al respecto. No hay nada m√°s disparatado que la idea que del protestantismo se forma un cura espa√Īol, aun de los que pasan por ilustrados. Hay muchos que se atienen al libro, tan endeble y pobre, de Balmes, y quienes repiten el famoso y desdichado argumento de Bossuet.

    Ayuda á corroborar y perpetuar este concepto lo que oyen á los protestantes ortodoxos con quienes tropiezan, á los protestante de capilla abierta, á los pastores á sueldo de alguna Sociedad Bíblica, porque la ortodoxia protestante es más mezquina y pobre, más raquítica que la católica, y es lamentable el culto supersticioso que rinde al Libro, á la Biblia, en su letra muerta.

    As√≠ como hay quienes no comprenden que haya darwinistas m√°s darwinistas que Darwin, as√≠ hay tambi√©n quienes no comprenden √≥ no quieren comprender que haya luteranos m√°s luteranos que Lutero, es decir, esp√≠ritus que hayan sacado al principio espec√≠fico del protestantismo, √° aquello que le diferenci√≥ y separ√≥ de la Iglesia cat√≥lica, consecuencias que los primeros protestantes no pudieron sacarle y aun ante las cuales retrocedieron. Porque una doctrina que se separa de otra tiene de esta otra de que se separa m√°s que de s√≠ misma, y en su principio lo que el protestantismo ten√≠a de com√ļn con el catolicismo era mucho m√°s que lo espec√≠fico y diferencial suyo.

    El protestantismo proclam√≥ el principio del libre examen y la justificaci√≥n por la fe —con un concepto de la fe, enti√©ndase bien, distinto del cat√≥lico—, y hasta cierto punto el valor simb√≥lico de los sacramentos; pero sigui√≥ conservando casi todos los dogmas no evang√©licos, y entre ellos el de la divinidad de Jesucristo, debidos √° la labor de los Padres griegos y latinos de los cinco primeros siglos, es decir, los dogmas de formaci√≥n y de tradici√≥n espec√≠ficamente cat√≥licas. Pero el principio del libre examen ha tra√≠do la ex√©gesis libre y rigurosamente cient√≠fica, y esta ex√©gesis, a base protestante, ha destru√≠do todos esos dogmas, dejando en pie un cristianismo evang√©lico, bastante vago √© indeterminado y sin dogmas positivos. Nada representa mejor esta tendencia que el llamado unitarianismo —tal como puede verse,, en los sermones de Channing (20)— √≥ una posici√≥n como la de Harnack (21). Y los protestantes ortodoxos, m√°s estrechos a√ļn de criterio que los cat√≥licos, execran de esa posici√≥n, y olvidando lo que dijo San Pablo al respecto, se obstinan en negar √° los que as√≠ pensamos hasta el nombre de cristianos.

    Y en una posici√≥n de esta √≠ndole lleg√≥ √° encontrarse Rizal seg√ļn de sus escritos deduzco. En una posici√≥n as√≠, no sin un bajo fondo de vacilaciones y dudas hamletianas, y siempre sobre un cimiento de catolicismo sentimental, sobre un estrato de su ni√Īez. Porque todo poeta lleva su ni√Īez muy √° flor de alma y de ella vive.

    Rizal fue tenido por protestante, y en la carta al P. Pastells que se inserta en la p√°gina 105 de esta obra, se le ver√° sincerarse de ello y hablar de sus paseos, en las soledades de Odenwald, con un pastor protestante. No creo, por otra parte, lo que dicen los jesu√≠tas en su Rizal y su obra de que √©ste hubiera le√≠do "todo lo escrito por protestantes y racionalistas y recogido todos sus argumentos". No hay que exagerar. La cultura religiosa de Rizal no era, seg√ļn de sus mismos escritos se deduce, la ordinaria entre nosotros; pero no era tampoco extraordinaria ni mucho menos. No pasaba de un dilettante en ella. Los ejemplos que los jesuitas citan —v√©ase la nota (116) de esta obra— son de lo m√°s com√ļn y muy de principios del siglo pasado. S√≥lo que bastaban para que le tuviesen por un hombre muy enterado de la literatura protestante y racionalista trat√°ndose de jesu√≠tas espa√Īoles, que en esto saben menos a√ļn que Rizal sab√≠a, con ser esto tan moderado y parco.

    La enorme, la vergonzosa ignorancia que entre nosotros reina al respecto, es lo que ha podido que √° Rizal se le tuviese por un librepensador. No; fue un librecreyente, lo cual es otra cosa. Rizal, lo aseguro, no hubiese jurado por B√ľchner √≥ por Haeckel.

    Basta leer en la p√°gina 292 de este libro la manera ingeniosa y sutil como Rizal expuso el principio de la relatividad del conocimiento, para comprender que no era un dogm√°tico del racionalismo, un te√≥logo al rev√©s, sino m√°s bien un librecreyente con sentido agn√≥stico y con un cimiento de cristianismo sentimental. Y en el fondo, conviene repetirlo, el catolicismo infantil y popular, nada teol√≥gico, de su ni√Īez, el catolicismo del ex secretario de la Congregaci√≥n de San Luis. Yo, que tambi√©n fui √° mis quince a√Īos secretario de esa misma Congregaci√≥n, creo saber algo de esto.

    √Ā Rizal se le tuvo por protestante y por german√≥filo, y ya se sabe lo que esto quiere decir entre nosotros. En Espa√Īa y para espa√Īoles, pasar por protestante √≥ cosa as√≠ es peor que pasar por ateo. Del catolicismo se pasa al ate√≠smo f√°cilmente; porque, como dec√≠a Channing, y hablando de Espa√Īa precisamente, las doctrinas falsas y absurdas llevan una natural tendencia √° engendrar escepticismo en los que las reciben sin reflexi√≥n, no habiendo nadie tan propenso √° creer demasiado poco como aquellos que empezaron creyendo demasiado mucho. Es corriente oir en Espa√Īa declarar que, de no ser cat√≥lico, debe serse ateo y anarquista, pues el protestantismo es un t√©rmino medio que ni la raz√≥n ni la fe abonan. Y cuando alguien se declara protestante le creen vendido al oro ingl√©s. El protestante aparece ante nosotros, m√°s a√ļn que como un anticat√≥lico, como un antiespa√Īol. El ate√≠smo es m√°s castizo a√ļn que el protestantismo. La herej√≠a se considera un delito contra la patria tanto √≥ m√°s que un delito contra la religi√≥n.

    Y aqu√≠ era ocasi√≥n de decir algo sobre esa sacr√≠lega confusi√≥n entre la religi√≥n y la patria, el desdichado consorcio entre el altar y el trono —no menos desdichado que aquel otro entre la cruz y la espada—, y las desastrosas consecuencias que ha tra√≠do tanto para el trono como para el altar. Pues es dif√≠cil saber si con semejante contubernio ha perdido la religi√≥n m√°s que la patria √≥ √©sta m√°s que aqu√©lla.

    En la nota (387) correspondiente a la p√°gina 306 de este libro, se hallar√° un estupendo ukase (22) del gobernador que fue de Pangasinan, D. Carlos Pe√Īaranda, en que conmina √° los cabezas de barangay (23) √° que oigan misa los d√≠as de precepto, bajo la multa de un peso si no lo hicieren. Esto era un brutal atentado √° la libertad y √° la dignidad de aquellos ciudadanos espa√Īoles, y √° la vez una impiedad manifiesta. Porque obligarle √° un fiel cristiano cat√≥lico √° que cumpla los deberes religiosos de su profesi√≥n bajo sanci√≥n civil, no es m√°s que una impiedad; es privar √° aquella ofrenda de culto de su valor espiritual y es atentar √° la libertad de la conciencia cristiana. Si los frailes que hac√≠an de p√°rrocos en Pangasin√°n hubieran tenido sentido religioso cristiano y cat√≥lico, habr√≠an sido los primeros en protestar de ese atentado.

    Y luego, l√©ase una vez m√°s aquel deplorable resultando de la orden de deportaci√≥n de Rizal por el general Despujol, aquel resultando en que se dice que descatolizar equival√≠a √° desnacionalizar aquella siempre espa√Īola —hoy ya no lo es— y como tal siempre cat√≥lica tierra filipina. Contrista el √°nimo la lectura de tales cosas, y m√°s √° los que creemos que para nacionalizar de veras √° Espa√Īa, una de las cosas que m√°s falta hacen es descatolizarla en el sentido en que Despujol y sus consejeros y directores espirituales tomaban el catolicismo. Pues acaso haya otro sentido en que quepa decir que la Iglesia cat√≥lica romana se est√° descatolizando.

    Rizal pas√≥ por un protestante, por un racionalista, por un librepensador, y en todo caso por anticat√≥lico. Y yo estoy convencido de que fue siempre un cristiano librecreyente, de vagos √© indecisos sentimientos religiosos, de mucha m√°s religiosidad que religi√≥n, y con cierto cari√Īo al catolicismo infantil y puramente po√©tico de su ni√Īez. No me chocar√≠a que, aun no creyendo ya con la cabeza en los dogmas cat√≥licos, hubiese alguna vez asistido √° misa en todas partes, y uno que naci√≥ y se cri√≥ cat√≥lico, en ning√ļn sitio mejor que en un templo cat√≥lico puede, fuera de su patria, hacerse la ilusi√≥n de encontrarse en ella.

    Condenado á muerte Rizal, bajo la inspiración del miedo sus jueces, cayeron sobre él sus antiguos maestros los jesuítas y apretaron el cerco con que de antiguo le venían asediando. Es una lucha tristísima.

    Pocas cosas m√°s instructivas como las relaciones del pobre Rizal con los jesu√≠tas, sus antiguos maestros. En ellas se ve de un lado el excelente buen natural de √©l, su respeto y su gratitud √° aquellos sus maestros que le hab√≠an tratado, y trataban en general al indio, con m√°s humanidad, con m√°s racionalidad, con m√°s esp√≠ritu cristiano que los frailes (3*).

    Y en ellas se ve tambi√©n la irremediable vulgaridad y ramploner√≠a del jesu√≠ta espa√Īol, con sus sabios de guardarrop√≠a, con sus sabios diligentes y √ļtiles mientras se trata de recoger, clasificar y exponer noticias, pero incapacitados por su educaci√≥n de elevarse √° una concepci√≥n verdaderamente filos√≥fica de las cosas.

    En la nota (363) √° la p√°g. 293 de este libro, dice Retana que aunque los jesu√≠tas ofrecieron publicar alg√ļn d√≠a el presente, y a√Īade, no s√© si con iron√≠a: "Respetamos las razones que tengan para mantener in√©ditas tan curiosas cartas". Yo, por mi parte, sospecho que aunque las de Rizal no deben ser un asombro, ni mucho menos, de pol√©mica religiosa —ya he dicho que creo nunca pas√≥ de un dilettante en tales materias como en otras—, deben quedar, sin embargo, malparados los jesu√≠tas. ¡Porque cuidado si son √©stos ignorantes, vulgares y ramplones en estas materias cuando son espa√Īoles! Baste decir que anda por ac√° un P. Murillo que se permite escribir de ex√©gesis y hablar de Harnack y del abate Loisy (24), y lo hace con una escol√°stica y una insipiencia que mete miedo.

    No hay leyenda m√°s desatinada que la leyenda de la ciencia jesu√≠tica, sobre todo de su ciencia religiosa. Son unos detestables te√≥logos y ex√©getas m√°s detestables a√ļn.

    S√≥lo √° un jesu√≠ta espa√Īol como el P. Pastells pudo ocurr√≠rsele regalar √° Rizal, para tratar de convertirle, las obras de Sard√° y Salvany (25). Esto da la medida de su mentalidad √≥ del pobre concepto que de Rizal se formaba. S√≥lo le falt√≥ a√Īadir las del P. Franco. Y hay que leer entre l√≠neas, en el relato de los jesu√≠tas, las necedades y vulgaridades que el P. Balaguer debi√≥ dejar caer sobre el pobre Rizal.

    Y as√≠ y con todo aparece Rizal vencido, convertido y retract√°ndose. Pero no con razones. Vencido, s√≠; convertido, acaso; pero convencido, no. La raz√≥n de Rizal no entr√≥ para nada en esta obra. Fue el poeta; fue el poeta que ve√≠a la muerte pr√≥xima; fue el poeta ante la mirada de la Esfinge que le iba √° tragar muy pronto, ante el pavoroso problema del m√°s all√°; fue el poeta que, √° la vista de aquella imagen del Sagrado Coraz√≥n, tallada por sus propias manos en d√≠as m√°s tranquilos, sinti√≥ que su ni√Īez le sub√≠a √° flor de alma. Fue el golpe maestro de los jesu√≠tas y vali√≥ m√°s que sus rid√≠culas razones todas (26).

    El pobre Cristo tagalo tuvo en la capilla su olivar, y es in√ļtil figur√°rnoslo como un estoico sin coraz√≥n. "¡No puedo dominar mi raz√≥n!", exclamaba el pobre ante el asedio del P. Balaguer. Cedi√≥; firm√≥ la retractaci√≥n. Luego le√≠a el Kempis. Se encontraba ante el gran misterio, y el pobre Hamlet, el Hamlet tagalo debi√≥ de decirse: ¿Y si hay? ¡Por si hay! Entonces su esp√≠ritu debi√≥ de pasar por un estado an√°logo al de aquel otro gran esp√≠ritu, al de aquel hombre de raz√≥n robust√≠sima, pero de sentimiento m√°s robusto a√ļn que su raz√≥n, que se llam√≥ Pascal y que dijo: il faut s'ab√™tir, "hay que embrutecerse"; y recomend√≥ tomar agua bendita, aun sin creer, para acabar creyendo.

    El relato de los √ļltimos momentos de Rizal, de su verdadera agon√≠a espiritual, es trist√≠simo. "¡Vamos camino del Calvario!" Y camino de su Calvario fue, pensando acaso en si aquel su sacrificio resultar√≠a in√ļtil; invadido tal vez por ese tremendo sentimiento de la vanidad del esfuerzo que ha sobrecojido √° tantos hombres √° las puertas de la muerte.

    "¡Qu√© hermoso d√≠a, Padre!" Ya no ver√≠a d√≠as as√≠, tan hermosos. Los ver√≠an los dem√°s; pero ¿no morir√≠an tambi√©n ellos? ¿Ver√≠a Filipinas d√≠as hermosos, despejados, claros?

    "¡Siete a√Īos pas√© yo all√≠!" (27) Y ante su esp√≠ritu so√Īador pasar√≠an siete a√Īos mansos y dulces, como las aguas de un arroyo que discurre en un valle de verdura.

    "En Espa√Īa y en el extranjero es donde me perd√≠." ¿Qu√© quiere decir perderse? El ni√Īo balbuc√≠a en √©l.

    "¡Yo no he sido traidor √° mi patria ni √° la naci√≥n espa√Īola!" No, no fue traidor. Es Espa√Īa la que le fue traidora √° √©l.

    "Mi gran soberbia, Padre, me ha tra√≠do aqu√≠." ¡La soberbia! ¿Y √° qui√©n que tenga una cabeza sobre los hombros y un coraz√≥n en el pecho no le pierde la soberbia? ¿Qu√© es eso de la soberbia? El que se confiesa soberbio no lo ha sido nunca. Los soberbios eran los otros, los soberbios eran los b√°rbaros que sobre su cad√°ver lanzaron, como un insulto √° Dios, aquel sacr√≠lego ¡viva Espa√Īa!

    "¡Mi soberbia me ha perdido!" Esto lo dec√≠a la mente que correspond√≠a √° las manos que tallaron la imagen del Sagrado Coraz√≥n, la mente del ni√Īo, del poeta. Y dec√≠a verdad. Su soberbia, s√≠, le perdi√≥ para que su raza ganase, porque todo aquel que quiera salvar su alma la perder√° y el que la deje perder la salvar√°. Su soberbia, s√≠, su santa soberbia, la conciencia de que en √©l viv√≠a una raza inteligente, noble y so√Īadora, la soberbia de sentirse igual √° aquellos blancos que le despreciaron, esta santa, esta noble soberbia le perdi√≥.

    En La Solidaridad del 15 de Julio de 1890, y en el art√≠culo "Una esperanza", escribi√≥ Rizal: "Dios ha prometido al hombre su redenci√≥n despu√©s del sacrificio: ¡cumpla el hombre con su deber y Dios cumplir√° con el suyo!"

    Rizal cumplió con su deber, y la Iglesia Filipina Independiente, considerando que Dios ha cumplido con el suyo, ha canonizado al gran tagalo: San José Rizal.

    San José Rizal

    San Jos√© Rizal, ¿y por qu√© no? ¿Por qu√© no se ha de dar la sanci√≥n de la santidad al culto √° los h√©roes?

    Pienso alg√ļn d√≠a escribir algo sobre esa extra√Īa Iglesia Filipina Independiente (28), cuyas publicaciones debo √° la bondad del Sr. D. Isabelo de los Reyes (29); sobre esa extra√Īa Iglesia que es un intento de vestir al racionalismo cristiano con s√≠mbolos y ceremonias cat√≥licos, y cuyo porvenir me parece muy dudoso. No son los pensadores los que hacen las religiones ni los que las reforman. M√°s f√°cil me parece que sobre la base del sentimiento cat√≥lico cristiano que all√≠ dej√≥ Espa√Īa se convierta en religi√≥n el culto mismo √° la patria, √° Filipinas, y que √©sta les aparezca como una peregrinaci√≥n para otra Filipinas celestial donde Rizal alienta y vive en esp√≠ritu.

    No sé si Rizal, con su fino sentido religioso, y aun á falta de una gran cultura á este respecto, habría aprobado una Iglesia en que se ve la mano del cura cismático, en que se ve la huella del fraile y de sus discípulos.

    Hay que desconfiar del cura cism√°tico √≥ del cura hereje √≥ renegado. Aunque se haga ateo, el cura quiere seguir siendo cura, y pretende que haya una Iglesia atea en que √©l contin√ļe como cura. La reforma religiosa la ve desde su punto de vista profesional.

    Pero sea de esto lo que fuere, y sea tambi√©n lo que fuere del c√°ndido racionalismo de la Iglesia Filipina Independiente y de sus ense√Īanzas, tan ingenuamente agn√≥sticas y cientificistas, es lo cierto que anduvo en canonizar √° Rizal mucho m√°s acertada que en otras cosas. Como que todas las dem√°s cosas huelen √° libros europeos, √° tomos de la Biblioteca Alcan, y esa, por el contrario, parece la flor de un movimiento espont√°neo del alma de un pueblo. Y las religiones las hacen los pueblos y no los pensadores; los pueblos con su coraz√≥n, y no los pensadores con su cabeza.

    El acto, pues, más transcendental de la Iglesia Filipina Independiente es haber sancionado la canonización de Rizal, promulgada por el pueblo filipino.

    Miguel de UNAMUNO.
    Salamanca, 19 y 20, V, 1907.

    Notas de Unamuno

    • (1*) Acaso haya muchos filipinos que ignoren que Tennyson, en su poes√≠a "A Ulises" (To Ulysses), llam√≥ √° Filipinas oriental eden-isles.
    • (2*) En mi obra Tres Ensayos he explicado qu√© es esto del chibolete.
    • (3* ) Hay que advertir que los jesu√≠tas, aunque no superan en cultura ni ilustraci√≥n √° los miembros de las dem√°s √≥rdenes religiosas, sino que m√°s bien son m√°s petulantes que ellos y m√°s ignorantes, les superan mucho en educaci√≥n y buenas formas. Se reclutan, por lo com√ļn, en otras capas sociales.

    Notas de la editora

    1. Maragato - natural de Maragater√≠a, comarca del reino de Le√≥n. [N. del E.]
    2. La Liga Filipina, asociaci√≥n cuyos fines eran promover la industria, el comercio, la cultura en Filipinas. Sus miembros, en su mayor√≠a nativos ilustrados, se compromet√≠an a ayudarse y protegerse contra las pr√°cticas injustas tanto del gobierno colonial como de las corporaciones religiosas. [N. del E.]
    3. P√≥litico liberal que junto con Sagasta fue instrumental en la revoluci√≥n de Septiembre 1868 que puso fin al reino de Isabel II. [N. del E.]
    4. Epifanio de los Santos, pol√≠tico y escritor nacionalista filipino, coet√°neo de Rizal. En la citada nota afirma que Rizal no se convierte de un Tolstoi a un Becerra, sino a un Jesucristo, redentor de su raza. [N. del E.]
    5. L√≠der y fundador de la sociedad secreta, el Katipunan, que tram√≥ la revoluci√≥n popular de 1896 contra Espa√Īa. Trabajaba como bodeguero para una empresa inglesa en Manila; fue descrito por Retana y otros de la √©poca como 'plebeyo' y 'analfabeto'. [N. del E.]
    6. Las l√≠neas: "...√° su patria perdido ed√©n". son tomadas por Unamuno de la √ļltima y m√°s famosa poes√≠a escrita por Rizal en v√≠speras de su ejecuci√≥n, conocida com√ļnmente por el t√≠tulo -aunque la original no llev√≥ t√≠tulo- "Mi √ļltimo adios". [N. del E.]
    7. Dice en las citadas p√°ginas del libro de Retana: ...Despu√©s de estos estudios [Lippert, Hellwald y otros], opin√≥ que su pueblo no era un pueblo antropoide, como quer√≠an hacer ver los espa√Īoles, pues encontr√≥ que las faltas y virtudes de los tagalos eran puramente humanas, pues estaba convencido de que los vicios y virtudes de un pueblo no eran particularidades de la raza, sino propiedades adquiridas, sobre las cuales tienen una acci√≥n poderosa el clima y la Historia.
      Sobre esto que él llamaba 'arte popular práctico', continuó sus estudios, para lo cual observaba la vida de los aldeanos franceses y alemanes, pues decía que los aldeanos son los que conservan por más largo tiempo las particularidades nacionales y de raza y son los que mejor podía comparar con sus paisanos, puesto que éstos en su mayoría se componían de gente del campo. Con este intento se retiró durante semanas y hasta meses en aldehuelas tranquilas donde observaba con atención los movimientos, actitudes y modo de ser de los aldeanos. El resumen de sus prácticas estudios científicos lo compendió en las siguientes proposiciones:
      1) Las razas humanas se diferencian en sus h√°bitos exteriores y en su esqueleto, pero no en la psique. Son igualmente apasionados; sienten y son movidos por los mismos dolores los blancos, amarillos y negros; s√≥lo las formas con que estos movimientos se exteriorizan son diferentes, pero ni aun √©stas son constantes en una misma raza, en ning√ļn pueblo, sino que var√≠an por la influencia de los m√°s diferentes factores.
      2) Las razas s√≥lo existen para los antrop√≥logos; para los observadores de la vida popular, s√≥lo existen capas sociales. As√≠ como hay monta√Īas que no poseen las capas superiores, as√≠ tambi√©n hay pueblos que tampoco poseen las capas sociales superiores; las inferiores son comunes √° todos los pueblos. Aun en los pueblos donde la civilizaci√≥n es m√°s antigua, como en Francia y Alemania, la masa principal de la poblaci√≥n est√° formada de una clase que se encuentra al mismo nivel intelectual que la masa principal de los tagalos; s√≥lo los separa el color de la piel, los trajes y la lengua. Pero mientras las monta√Īas no crecen en altura, los pueblos van poco √° poco creciendo en capas superiores. Este crecimiento no es sin embargo dependiente √ļnicamente de la aptitud de los pueblos, sino tambi√©n de la suerte y de otros innumerables factores, f√°cilmente reconocibles.
      3) No solamente pol√≠ticos coloniales, sino hasta hombres de ciencia opinan que hay razas de inteligencia limitada que nunca podr√°n llegar √° la altura de los europeos. Esto, seg√ļn opini√≥n de RIZAL, no es cierto; pues dice: con la inteligencia ocurre lo que con las riquezas: hay pueblos ricos y pueblos pobres, como hay individuos ricos √© individuos pobres. El rico que cree que ha nacido rico, se equivoca; ha llegado al mundo tan pobre y desnudo como su esclavo; lo que ocurre es que hereda las riquezas que sus padres han acaparado. Pues con la inteligencia sucede que se hereda de la misma manera: as√≠, pueblos que por circunstancias especiales se vieron necesitados √° hacer trabajos intelectuales, llegaron √° adquirir su mayor desarrollo intelectual, que fue aumentando, y transmiti√©ndose de unos √° otros. Los pueblos europeos se han encontrado en estas circunstancias: por eso son tan ricos en inteligencia; pues no s√≥lo se han heredado de unos √° otros, sino que se ha acrecentado, por la necesaria libertad y por leyes ventajosas, debidas √° algunos esp√≠ritus directores que dejaron como herencia √° sus actuales sucesores su riqueza intelectual.
      4) El juicio poco favorable que los europeos tienen de los indios, tiene su explicaci√≥n; pero no es justo. RIZAL lo fundamentaba como sigue: hacia pa√≠ses ex√≥ticos no emigra gente d√©bil, sino hombres fuertes, que no solamente llevan de su casa juicios preventivos, sino que la mayor parte de las veces se creen obligados √° ejercer dominio sobre esta gente. Es sabido que la gente de color teme la brutalidad con que se les trata, y esto debido √° que no puede replicar exponiendo sus razones, explica por qu√© colaboran tan mal √° la obra de los espa√Īoles. Hay que tener en cuenta adem√°s que los de color, la mayor parte de las veces pertenecen √° las capas inferiores de la sociedad: y por lo tanto el juicio de los blancos tiene el mismo valor que el que pudiera formar un tagalo ilustrado de los franceses y alemanes, si los juzgase por los pastores, porteros, etc., de estos pa√≠ses.

    8. Dr. Ferdinand Blumentritt, austr√≠aco, etn√≥logo, ling√ľista, filipinista y mejor amigo del Dr. Rizal. [N. del E.]

    9. Pueblito en la gran isla sure√Īa de Mindanao donde Rizal fue relegado entre 1892-1896. Solicit√≥ ser enviado como m√©dico a Cuba y viajaba rumbo a Espa√Īa en septiembre de 1896 cuando fue apresado y enviado de vuelta a Manila, para responder a cargos de sedici√≥n, ya que hab√≠a sido implicado por miembros del Katipunan como el l√≠der del movimiento. Fue enjuiciado por un tribunal militar y fusilado el 30 de diciembre de 1896. [N. del E.]
    10. Los frailes se refer√≠an a Rizal como un mesticillo vulgar o mesticillo chino. [N. del E.]
    11. Palacio donde resid√≠a el gobernador general, hoy el palacio presidencial, ubicado a orillas del r√≠o Pasig en Manila. [N. del E.]
    12. Hasta los a√Īos treinta el castellano fue el idioma de los tribunales y del Congreso. S√≥lo despu√©s de la II Guerra Mundial pudo darse el cambio definitivo al ingl√©s en Filipinas. [N. del E.]
    13. D. Cris√≥stomo Ibarra, h√©roe del Noli, es hijo de espa√Īol y filipina. Vuelve a las islas tras estudiar largo tiempo en el extranjero y pronto se encuentra en l√≠os con los frailes por crear proyectos de educaci√≥n y porque descubre que uno de ellos fue el responsable del encarcelamiento y muerte de su padre. [N. del E.]
    14. Tagalo, del espa√Īol zaragate. En el Diccionario tagalo-ingl√©s de L.J. English C.Ss.R. aparece este vocablo como "saragate" y no como aqu√≠ lo deletrea Unamuno. [N. del E.]
    15. En ingl√©s, "shibboleth" significa esl√≥gan, lema. [N. del E.]
    16. Andr√©s de Urdaneta (1508-1568), navegante y misionero agustino que acompa√Ī√≥ a Legazpi en su expedici√≥n a Filipinas en 1564 (Peque√Īo Larousse ilustrado, 1987).
    17. Se trata de un doble juego de palabras que dice relaci√≥n con la obra cl√°sica, "El Desd√©n con el desd√©n", del dramaturgo espa√Īol Agust√≠n Moreto (1618-1669). Seg√ļn el an√°lisis de Francisco Rico en 1971: "La f√°bula o acci√≥n es √©sta: Carlos, Conde de Urgel, enamorado de Diana, princesa en extremo esquiva y enemiga de amores y de casamiento, juzgando imposible empresa el vencer su esquivez por los medios regulares de amor y rendimiento, elige el de fingir indiferencia y desamor, y con esta traza logra su intento, pues Diana, rendida al fingido desd√©n de Carlos, se da a partido y le da la mano de esposa....El meollo del argumental: ense√Īar que s√≥lo amamos lo inaccesible y que s√≥lo fingi√©ndonos inaccesibles obtendremos que nos amen, mostrar que la mejor arma para vencer un desd√©n es otro desd√©n." [N. del E.]
    18. Las cosas est√°n cambiando y nos atrevemos a afirmar que a d. Miguel no le parecer√≠a mal la internacionalizaci√≥n de la justicia y el papel que en √©l est√°n desempe√Īando sus connacionales respecto de las ex colonias. [N. del E.]
    19. En v√≠speras de su ejecuci√≥n Rizal escribi√≥ una retractaci√≥n en que abjur√≥ la Masoner√≠a y volvi√≥ a la Iglesia. Una hora antes de caminar al lugar de fusilamiento se cas√≥ con su amante inglesa Josephine Bracken. Desde comienzos del siglo XX ha habido pol√©mica en Filipinas entre los masones, quienes niegan que hubo tal retractaci√≥n, y los partidarios de la Iglesia. En los a√Īos treinta miembros de la Facultad de Derecho del Colegio de San Beda sometieron el documento (encontrado en el archidi√≥cesis de Manila despu√©s de traspapelarse durante d√©cadas) al an√°lisis de peritos caligr√°ficos, quienes lo declararon aut√©ntico. [N. del E.]
    20. William Ellery Channing (1780-1842), teólogo norteamericano, fundador del unitarianismo (Gran Enciclopedia Larousse, 1987).
    21. Adolf von Harnack (1851-1930), te√≥logo luterano alem√°n. Primero fue profesor (1876), luego miembro de la Academia de Ciencias de Berl√≠n (1890), principal representante de la escuela cr√≠tica racionalista. "Para √©l lo esencial de la fe reside en la piedad hacia Dios, a semejanza de la actitud de Cristo. Considera que el cristiano es libre para criticar al dogma, que, seg√ļn √©l, es la traducci√≥n intelectual del Evangelio, vinculada a una etapa de desarrollo hist√≥rico del pensamiento, e influida por el platonismo y el aristotelismo" (Ibidem.).
    22. Ucase, orden gubernativa injusta y desp√≥tica (Dicc. de Palabras olvidadas de uso poco frecuente, E. Mu√Īoz, Madrid: Ed. Paraninfo s. a., 1992).
    23. El barangay equivale a un barrio y la cabeza de barangay tendr√≠a su contrapartre moderna en el presidente de la junta de vecinos. En tiempos remotos, el barangay era una embarcaci√≥n de remos y dice la tradici√≥n que las islas fueron habitadas por oleadas de inmigrantes provenientes de Borneo, Indonesia etc., quienes viajaron en dichas embarcaciones. Les dieron a sus asentamientos el mismo nombre y en tiempo de los espa√Īoles un barangay lo conformaban "cuarenta y cinco a cincuenta familias ind√≠genas o mestizas en que se dividen los pueblos en Filipinas" (Peque√Īo Larousse ilustrado, 1987). Los antiguos jefes o datus fueron nombrados cabezas de barangay por los espa√Īoles.
      Dice la nota de Retana: "El gobernador de Pangasin√°n D. Carlos Pe√Īaranda dirigi√≥ √° los Gobernadorcillos de dicha provincia la siguiente circular:
      'Teniendo noticia este Gobierno civil que la mayor parte de los Cabezas de barangay de ese pueblo no oyen misa en los d√≠as de precepto, por la presente prevengo √° usted que si en lo sucesivo dejan de cumplir deber tan sagrado, asistiendo √° misa en comunidad, present√°ndose luego al R.C. P√°rroco y reuni√©ndose en el Tribunal para enterarse de cuantas √≥rdenes se relacionan con el cargo que desempe√Īan y dem√°s que les concierne, ser√° usted incurso en la multa de cinco pesos por cada falta en que incurriere y la de un peso por cada Cabeza de barangay y por cada vez que deje de asistir √° misa sin fundado motivo. Ac√ļsese recibo, y arch√≠vese. —Lingay√©n, 12 de Junio de 1891—. Pe√Īaranda.'
      "Este documento da perfecta idea de lo que all√≠ se transformaban los hombres. Pe√Īaranda, que tiene un puesto en la historia de la Literatura Espa√Īola, hab√≠ase distinguido en Puerto Rico por excesivamente simpatizador con los isle√Īos; no ocultaba que hab√≠a sido mas√≥n del grado 33 ni sus ideales democr√°ticos. Y este hombre en Filipinas anula por completo todos sus antecedentes para dictar la circular transcrita. Pero aun hizo m√°s: dio otra que caus√≥ la estupefacci√≥n de todos los espa√Ī Espa√Īa: no falt√≥ peri√≥dico madrile√Īo que le llamase Pe√Īaranda I, por la circular que reproducimos √° continuaci√≥n (la cual reprodujeron casi todos los peri√≥dicos peninsulares):
      'Gobierno civil de Pangasin√°n. — Gobernadorcillo de...
      'Viene observando este Gobierno, con la mayor extra√Īeza, que los ind√≠genas, no s√≥lo no saludan √° los espa√Īoles peninsulares que encuentran √° su paso en la v√≠a p√ļblica, sino que tampoco tributan ese homenaje de consideraci√≥n y respeto √° las personas constituidas en autoridad, √≥ que por sus funciones pertenecen √° la Administraci√≥n p√ļblica.
      'Considerando que esta falta de respeto envuelve tambi√©n una censurable ingratitud por parte del indio hacia los descendientes de los hombres ilustres, √° quien deben su educaci√≥n moral y religiosa y los beneficios de su actual civilizaci√≥n, y teniendo en cuenta las facultades que me concede el art√≠culo 610 del t√≠tulo 5.¬ļ del C√≥digo penal vigente en estas islas, he acordado lo siguiente:
      '1.¬ļ Todo indio, sea cualquiera su clase y posici√≥n social, al encontrarse en la v√≠a p√ļblica con funcionarios investidos de una autoridad, sea gubernativa, judicial, eclesi√°stica √≥ administrativa, se descubrir√° en prueba de respeto.
      '2.¬ļ De igual manera, y como prueba de consideraci√≥n, se descubrir√° al paso de todos los espa√Īoles peninsulares.
      '3.¬ļ Los infractores de esta disposici√≥n ser√°n castigados con la multa de cinco pesos, √≥ en caso de insolvencia, con la prisi√≥n subsidiaria equivalente y destino √° los trabajos p√ļblicos.
      '4.¬ļ Publicar√° usted por bandillo, durante tres noches consecutivas, en dialecto del pa√≠s, las prescripciones contenidas en la presente orden para general conocimiento.
      'Acusar√° usted recibo de la presente orden, que archivar√° seg√ļn est√° indicado. — Lingay√©n, 29 de Mayo de 1891. — Carlos Pe√Īaranda.'
      "La Solidaridad, escrita por indios (que en Madrid no eran indios, sino espa√Īoles nacidos en Filipinas), puso este comentario:
      'Vamos a ver: se manda en el bando que el indio se descubra al paso de todos los espa√Īoles peninsulares como prueba de consideraci√≥n: ¿por qu√© no se ha de descubrir el peninsular al paso del indio, siendo √©ste tan espa√Īol como aqu√©l, y adem√°s le asiste al indio el leg√≠timo derecho de estar en su casa, siendo el peninsular un peregrino que, √° lo mejor, lejos de proporcionarle bienestar, lo explota?'
      "Esta era, despu√©s de todo, la buena doctrina, que, naturalmente, los filipinos en su pa√≠s residentes ve√≠an con sumo gusto al enojo del Gobernador, que hab√≠a obrado (huelga decirlo) sugestionado por los frailes, sin caer en la cuenta de que pod√≠an en Espa√Īa decir los indios lo que L√≥pez Jaena dijo en La Solidaridad del 15 de Octubre del mismo a√Īo:
      'Ya los indios no son mansos corderos que se llevan al matadero; tienen noci√≥n de su dignidad y de su derecho; son hombres como los frailes, como el Gobernador que dict√≥ el bando; y como hombres, han sabido que no consiste en los saludos ni en besamanos el cumplimiento de la ley, sino en llenar debidamente sus deberes de buen ciudadano espa√Īol.' (S√≠ntesis de la doctrina sustentada por RIZAL.)
      "Pero todav√≠a hubo otro Gobernador que fue m√°s all√° que Pe√Īaranda. En La Solidaridad del 15 de Marzo de 1894 se lee que al hacerse cargo del mando civil de una de las provincias meridionales de Luz√≥n un se√Īor teniente coronel de artiller√≠a (no cita el nombre), dirigi√≥ √° los Gobernadorcillos una circular que dec√≠a √° la letra:
      'Al encargarme del mando de esta provincia, prevengo √° ustedes que la norma de mi conducta ser√° ce√Īirme en absoluto √° lo dispuesto en las leyes y reglamentos vigentes, siendo inexorable para el que falte √° ellos, as√≠ como seguro apoyo y garant√≠a para hacer justicia.
      'Guardar√°n ustedes las mayores atenciones y respetos con los reverendos curas p√°rrocos, UNICOS √° quienes podr√°n ustedes ense√Īar y consultar en las √≥rdenes que reciban de este Gobierno, sin que nadie m√°s deba enterarse de ellas.'
      "¿Qui√©n mandaba en el pa√≠s, el Ministro √≥ los frailes? Qui√©n era el amo? Pues bien: √° los indios que aqu√≠ sosten√≠an la buena doctrina, les llam√°bamos filibusteros; y √° las autoridades que all√° comet√≠an tales imprudencias, se les llamaba insignes patriotas."
    24. Alfredo Loisy (1857-1940) "Exegeta franc√©s que profesaba la independencia absoluta de la cr√≠tica b√≠blica y de la historia eclesi√°stica respecto a la revelaci√≥n y los dogmas, concibiendo un Cristo hist√≥rico distinto al Cristo de la fe. En 1902, con el pretexto de refutar La esencia del Cristianismo, de A. Harnack, public√≥ El Evangelio y la Iglesia, que fue condenado por el Arzobispo de Par√≠s (1903). Fue excomunicado en 1908, rompi√≥ con la Iglesia y fue luego profesor de historia de las religiones en el Colegio de Francia (1909-1933). Entre sus publicaciones destacadas son: Los misterios paganos y el misterio cristiano (1919) y La Moral humana (1923)" (Gran Enciclopedia Larousse, 1987).
    25. F√©lix Sard√° y Salvany (1844-1916) Eclesi√°stico espa√Īol. "...Goz√≥ de gran fama como polemista integrista. Dirigi√≥ durante 43 a√Īos Revista popular, semanario cat√≥lico, y public√≥ numerosos folletos, reunidos posteriormente en Propaganda cat√≥lica (7 vols., 1803-1890). Sin embargo, fue El Liberalismo es un pecado (1884), m√°ximo exponente de su integrismo, la obra que provoc√≥ mayores controversias " (Ibidem.)
      Integrismo: "Tendencia pol√≠ticorreligiosa de algunos cat√≥licos que pretenden profesar un catolicismo √≠ntegro asoci√°ndolo a una ideolog√≠a conservadora. Desde fines del s. XIX y principios del XX, y particularmente durante toda la crisis modernista, los cat√≥licos que quer√≠an alardear de adhesi√≥n sin reservas al Catolicismo acostumbraban darse el nombre de cat√≥licos √≠ntegros. Integrismo ha venido a significar una especie de totalitarismo religioso que pretende sacar √ļnicamente de la fe la respuesta a todas las cuestiones de la vida privada y p√ļblica, y que, en consecuencia, niega la autonom√≠a leg√≠tima de los diferentes √°mbitos de la vida, someti√©ndolos a la potestad directa de la Iglesia. El integrismo, con todo, es m√°s un temperamento que una corriente. Sus rasgos fundamentales son: intransigente fidelidad a las ense√Īanzas pontificias; lucha abierta contra el naturalismo, el laicismo, la revoluci√≥n y el comunismo; cierto puritanismo moral" (Ibidem.).
    26. Rizal a los 14 a√Īos hab√≠a tallado de madera noble la imagen del Sagrado coraz√≥n como regalo a uno de sus profesores que volv√≠a a Espa√Īa, pero se le hab√≠a quedado. El d√≠a antes de su muerte uno de los jesu√≠tas que acompa√Īaron a Rizal en capilla le trajo la imagen, quedando Rizal profundamente conmovido. [N. del E.]
    27. Dijo Rizal mientras caminaba al lado de la ciudad amurallada Intramuros, al ver la torre de la iglesia de Ateneo de Manila, donde fue alumno desde los 11 hasta los 18 a√Īos. [N. del E.]
    28. Conocida en Filipinas como la "Aglipayan Church". Su fundador, Gregorio Aglipay, fue un sacerdote cat√≥lico que pas√≥ al gobierno revolucionario y form√≥ la iglesia filipina en Agosto de 1902. [N. del E.]
    29. Patriota y escritor filipino. [N. del E.]


    W.E. Retana. Vida y Escritos del Dr. Jos√© Rizal. Madrid: Librer√≠a General de Victoriano Su√°rez, 1907. [Edici√≥n Ilustrada con fotograbados. Pr√≥logo de Javier G√≥mez de la Serna y Ep√≠logo de Miguel de Unamuno. Edici√≥n digital y notas de Elizabeth Medina]

    © Jos√© Luis G√≥mez-Mart√≠nez
    Nota: Esta versi√≥n electr√≥nica se provee √ļnicamente con fines educativos. Cualquier reproducci√≥n destinada a otros fines, deber√° obtener los permisos que en cada caso correspondan.


    (to Life and Writings of Dr. Jos√© Rizal de WE Retana)

    I have just read the Life and Writings of Dr. Rizal , by WE Retana for the second time , and I close its reading with a tumult of bitter reflections in my spirit, from which a luminous figure emerges, that of Rizal. A man full of destiny, a heroic soul, the idol today of a people who will one day play, I have no doubt, a fruitful role in human civilization.

    Who was this man?

    The man

    With an intimate interest, I was going through Retana's book that diary that Rizal kept in Madrid as a student. Beneath his terse annotations beats a dreaming soul as much or more than in the rhetorical amplifications of the fictional characters in which his spirit woven of hopes later incarnated.

    Rizal studied Philosophy and Letters in Madrid for the same years that I was studying at the same Faculty, although he was finishing it when I started it. I must have seen the Tagalog more than once in the vulgar cloisters of the Central University, I must have crossed paths with him more than once while we dreamed of Rizal in his Philippines and I in my Vasconia.

    In his diary he does not forget to record his attendance at the chair of Greek, to which he seemed to be fond of and in which he obtained the first qualification. I don't miss it. Rizal was not exactly fond of Greek, I can assure you: Rizal was fond of D. L√°zaro Bard√≥n, our venerable teacher, as I was. In the Noli me tangere there are two touches that come from D. L√°zaro. One of them is to translate the principle of Glory as Bard√≥n translated it: "Glory to God in the highest; on earth, peace; among men, good will." Don L√°zaro was one of Rizal's affections; I assure you that I was a disciple of Don L√°zaro and that I have read Rizal's newspaper and works.

    And that noble and rude maragato (1) deserved it , that soul of a child, that holy man who was Don L√°zaro, a secularized priest. If all the Spaniards that Rizal knew had been like D. L√°zaro ...!

    In those cloisters of the Central University we must have crossed, I mean, the Tagalog who dreamed in his Philippines, and I, the Biscayan, who dreamed in my Vasconia. Romantic both.

    Retana is right when he says that Rizal was always a romantic, meaning a dreamer, an idealist, a poet in short. Yes, a romantic, as all Filipinos are, according to Mr. Taviel de Andrade.

    Nor was his whole life anything other than an unrepentant dreamer, a poet. And not precisely in the rhythmic compositions in which he tried to pour the poetry of his soul, but in all his works, in his life above all.

    He loved his homeland, the Philippines, with poetry, with religiosity. He made a religion out of his patriotism, and I'll talk about this later. And he loved Spain with poetry, with religiosity too. And this led to those who did not know how to love her, either with poetry or with religion, led him to death.

    "Oriental Quixote" once called him Retana, and he is well named. But it was a Quixote dubbed from a Hamlet; he was a Quixote of thought, who was repulsed by the impurities of reality.

    His exploits were his books, his writings; his heroism was the heroism of the writer.

    But let it be understood that not from the professional writer, not from the one who thinks or feels to write, but from the man full of love who writes because he has thought or felt. And the difference is very great - about which Schopenhauer drew attention - from thinking to writing to writing because it has been thought.

    Rizal was a poet, a hero of thought and not of action, but insofar as thought is action, the verb, which was already in the beginning, was with God and was God himself, and by whom all things were made according to the Gospel.

    Says Retana when, back Rizal to Manila in 1892, he entered politics, founding the League (2) , the "mystical Lyrist" became a worker in prose, and pendant of Tolstoi on a pendant Becerra (3) . Perhaps with this he rendered greater service to the Philippine cause; but his figure diminishes, he adds. And Mr. Santos (4) confronts Retana with some considerations that the reader can read in note (312), page 252 of this work.

    The heroes of thought are not masters of their action; the wind of the Spirit takes them where they did not intend to go. In order to master the external acts of one's life, a certain imaginative poverty is very convenient, and, on the other hand, the great courageous of thought, the spirits thrown into forging ideas and rushing them to their ideal and theoretical consequences, are seldom men of energetic will for the external acts of life. Galileo, so heroic in thinking, was weak before the Holy Office. And this is the common and very true psychology of the teacher of Le Desciple [sic], by Bourget. If not, study the life of Spinoza, that of Kant, that of so many other heroic thinkers.

    Rizal, the brave dreamer, seems to me a weak and irresolute will for action and life. His withdrawal, his shyness, attested a hundred times, his shame, are but one form of that Hamletian disposition. To have been a practical revolutionary, he would have needed the simple mentality of an Andr√©s Bonifacio (5) . It was, I think, an embarrassing and hesitant one.

    And these previous heroes, these great conquerors of the intimate world, when the action drags them, heroes also appear, heroes by force, of the action. Read without prejudice the life of Luther, that giant of the heart, who could never know where his fate led him. It was an instrument of Providence, as was Rizal.

    Rizal foresaw his end, his glorious and tragic end; but he foresaw it passively, like the protagonist of a Greek tragedy. He did not go to him, but felt drawn to him. And he was able to say: Lord, your will be done and not mine!

    It is the same story of so many providential men who fulfilled a destiny without having proposed it, and who, closed in on themselves, building their dreams to give them to others as consolation and hope, became leaders.

    Retana says somewhere that Rizal was a mystic. Let's admit it. Yes, he was a mystic, and like so many mystics, from his stylite tower, with his eyes in the sky and his arms raised, he led his people to struggle and life.

    Rizal was a writer, or, let's say rather, a man who wrote what he thought and felt. And as a writer is how he did his work.

    The writer

    In this book you will find Rizal's judgments as a writer; in it he is examined as a writer.

    It should be noted first of all, and Retana does not omit it, that Rizal wrote his works in Castilian, and that Castilian was not his native maternal language, or, at least, that it was not the indigenous and natural language of his people. Spanish is in the Philippines, as it is in my Basque country, an adventitious and recently implanted language, and I suppose that even those who have had it there as a cradle language, as a language in which they received the caresses of their mother and in which They learned to pray, they have not been able to receive it with roots.

    I judge for myself. I learned to stammer in Spanish, and Spanish was spoken at home, but Spanish from Bilbao, that is to say, a poor and shy Spanish, a Castilian in blankets, not infrequently a bad translation from Basque. And those of us who, having learned it this way, then have to make use of it to express what we have thought and felt, we are forced to reshape it, to make ourselves a language with effort. And this, which is in a certain respect our weakness as writers, is at the same time our strength.

    Because our language is not a caput mortuum , it is not something that we have passively received, it is not a routine, but rather it is something alive and throbbing, something in which our struggle is seen. Our words are living words; we resuscitate the dead and animate with new life those who had it languid. We cast our language, ours by right of conquest, with our hearts and brains.

    Retana applies to Rizal the well-known distinction between language and style, and the very clear doctrine that you can have your own strong or broad style with a defective language, and, on the contrary, be very correct and accurate in diction, lacking in absolute self-styled.

    The distinction has been made a thousand times; but these barbarians who think in Castilian by inheritance and routine, and who go around with grammar and sloppiness, fail to penetrate it. You have to leave them. All his miserable literature will sink into oblivion, and soon no one will remember his barbarous imitations of the language of the seventeenth or sixteenth century, no one will take into account his weary and tiring voiced emptiness.

    Rizal's style is, generally, soft, undulating, sinuous, without rigidities or corners, sinning, if anything, diffuse. It is an oratory style and it is a Hamletian style, full of indecision amid the firmness of central thought, full of conceptualities. It is not the style of a dogmatist.

    Like Plato, he poured his ideas into dialogues, for nothing else but sociological dialogues, and at times philosophical, are his novels. He needed more than one character to show the multiplicity of his spirit. Retana says that Rizal is the Ibarra and not the El√≠as de Noli me tangere, and I believe that it is one and the other, and that it is when they contradict each other. Because Rizal was a spirit of contradictions, a soul that feared the revolution, longing for it deep down; a man who trusted and mistrusted both his countrymen and racial brothers, who believed them to be the most capable and the least capable - the most capable when he looked at himself, who was of his blood, and the most incapable when he looked at others. "Rizal was a man who oscillated between fear and hope, between faith and despair." And all these contradictions were united in a bundle by his ardent love, his poetic love, his love, made of dreams, for his adored homeland, his beloved region of the sun, pearl of the eastern sea, his lost Eden 1 * ) ( 6) .

    This Tagalog Don Quixote-Hamlet found in a very deep affection, in a truly religious passion — for religious was, as I will say later, his cult of his homeland, the Philippines — the focus of his contradictions and the end of his enthusiasm for culture. I wanted the culture; but he wanted it for his people, to redeem and exalt it. His constant theme was to make educated and enlightened Filipinos, to make them complete men. And he was repulsed by the revolution, because he feared it would endanger the work of culture. And despite fearing her, perhaps he desired her despite himself.

    Rizal, deeply religious soul, felt well that freedom is not an end, but a means; that it is not enough for a man or a people to want to be free if they do not form an idea — an ideal rather — of the use that they are to make of that freedom later.

    Rizal was not a supporter of Philippine independence; This is clear from his all writings. And it was not because he did not believe his country qualified for independent nationality, because he believed that it still needed the patronage of Spain and that it would continue to protect it - or rather to protect it - until it reached its age of emancipation. Thought that those who persecuted him saw very well, those unfortunate Spaniards who never formed a human notion of what a metropolis should be and who always considered the colonies as a farm, populated by indigenous people like domestic animals, to be exploited .

    And how they exploited it! With what contempt for the Filipino Spaniard, for the colonial compatriot! This contempt, rather than oppressions and humiliations of another kind, that barbarian and anti-Christian contempt was always carried by Rizal in his soul like a thorn. He felt in himself all the humiliations of his race. It was a symbol of it.


    Rizal was, in effect, a symbol , in the etymological and primitive sense of this word; that is to say, a compendium, a summary of his race. And like every man who comes to symbolize, to summarize a people, one of the few representative men of humanity in general.

    It is understood that Rizal is today the idol, the saint of the Filipino Malays. He is a man who seems to say to them: "You can reach me; you can be what I was, since you are flesh of my flesh and blood of my blood."

    Unitarian Protestants say, that is, those who do not admit the dogma of the Trinity or that of the divinity of Jesus Christ, that believing Jesus to be a pure man and no more than a man, a man like the others, although the one in whom the conscience of filiality with respect to God became more alive and clearer; that to believe this is a much more pious and consoling belief than to believe the Christ a God-man, the second person of the incarnate Trinity, because, if Christ was man, it is possible that other men reach where he arrived; but, if he was a God, it is impossible for us to match him.

    And I have read in a Mexican writing that the life and work of the great Indian Benito Ju√°rez has been an example and a redemption for many Mexican Indians, who have seen one of their own, of pure American blood, come to incarnate in a moment to the homeland, to be her living conscience and to carry in her stoic and religious soul — religiously stoic — her destinies. Many of the whites and mestizos that surrounded Juarez could have had, and some had, more intelligence and more enlightenment than he; But none had such a well-tempered heart and such a deep and religious feeling for the homeland as that indigenous lawyer, of pure American blood, who did not learn Spanish but already a talludite, and who, by losing faith in Catholic dogmas in that his relative the priest educate him,He transferred that faith to the principles of law that he learned in the classrooms to apply them to his homeland, Mexico, felt as a divine power.

    It is also in the classrooms that Rizal became aware of Tagalog; in the classrooms, where he was taught incomprehensible, disdainful and arrogant targets. It is he himself who in chapter XIV, "A student house", of his novel El Filibusterismo , tells us: "The barriers that politics establishes between the races disappear in the classrooms as if melted in the heat of science and youth. . " And it is what he longed for for his homeland: science and youth — youth, not childhood — that would melt the barriers between the races.

    These barriers, and even more than the legal ones, those established by customs, tormented Rizal's generous soul. The conscience of his own race, conscience that he owed to his personal superiority, fertilized by education, that conscience was one of pain. With deep, deep poetic sense he was able to call the Philippines in his last song, the one of farewell: My idolized homeland, pain of my pains! Yes, his homeland was his conscience, because in him the Philippines became aware of itself, and in him, Christ of her, was redeemed by suffering.

    Rizal had to suffer the petulant brutality of the white man, for which there is no word but a Greek word: authad√≠a . Which means the complacency that one feels with himself, the satisfaction of being who he is, the recreation of himself, and then, in the ordinary sense, arrogance, insolence. And this is the target: arrogant, insolent, self- righteous . And arrogant for misunderstanding the soul of others, for asymmetry , that is, for inability to enter the souls of others and see and feel the world as they see and feel it.

    It would be very curious to make a review of all the nonsense and all the nonsense that men of the white or Caucasian race have invented to base our claim to native and original superiority over other races. Here they would enter from biblical fantasies to pseudo-Darwinian fantasies, without forgetting that of the blond-dollar and other analogous ridiculous things. A quality that distinguishes us is a privilege or an advantage, that which we lack is a defect. And when we come across a case like the recent one in Japan, we don't know where to go.

    Rizal had this ethnological concern, and his conclusions in this regard can be read on pages 137 and 138 of this book (7) . And on different occasions, especially in his annotations to the book Events of the Philippine Islands , by Dr. Antonio de Morga, it can be seen how he tried to tell his countrymen about the charges that the white man made them.

    On p. 23 of this book, the reader will have seen what Prof. Blumentritt (8) tells about the fact that Rizal, from a young age, was greatly resentful of being treated by the Spanish with some contempt, just for being an Indian. Blumentritt's statements in this regard are not wasted.

    For almost all Spaniards who have passed through the Philippines, the Indian is a small child who never reaches the greatest age. Let us remember that the grave Egyptian priests regarded the Greeks as children, and think about whether our Spaniards did not play there, at most, the role of Egyptians of decadence among incipient Greeks, Greeks in social childhood.

    Others speak of the servility of the Indian, and in this regard it only happens to me to consider what happens here, in the Peninsula, in which the natives of a certain region are considered the most servile, these being the ones who perhaps have the most developed feeling of inner freedom and dignity. A street sweeper with his broom, a water carrier with his tub, can have and usually has a finer sense of his dignity and independence than the hungry hidalgo who disdains him and goes around asking for jobs or grants. Servility is usually dressed here in the arrogant robe of a nobleman, and the insolent beggar within us is cloaked in his arrogance. Our picaresque literature tells us a lot about it.

    Rizal had a fine sense of social hierarchies, he never forgot the treatment that each one was owed. Retana's account of the fact that at official receptions in Dapitan (9) he greeted those present in order of hierarchy is extremely interesting; but at family gatherings, he did it first to the ladies, even though they were Indians. This, which is a Japanese-style trait, the insolent officers with their subordinates and crawlers with their superiors, or the uncouth friars, fed up with borona or rye in their land, were not able to appreciate in all its value, who tutored everything. Indian.

    "Here comes the most lost of the Peninsula, and if a good one arrives, it will soon corrupt the country", says a character from Noli me tangere . I will not dispute the greater or lesser accuracy of that statement —a statement that, unfair as it may be, has been made a thousand times in Spain; "But what Spaniards Rizal must have known in the Philippines!" And, above all, what friars! Because the friars are recruited here, generally, among the most uneducated classes, among the most uncouth and most rustic. They leave the esteva or laya to enter a convent; There the hair of the pasture is brushed with barbarous Latin and indigestible scholasticism, and then they find themselves as rustic and uneducated as when they entered, converted into parents and object of the veneration and respect of many people. Must not their authorship develop ?, the gratuitous pride? Transfer a man under these conditions to a country like the Philippines; Put him among timid, ignorant, fanaticized simple Indians, and tell yourself what has to turn out.

    On one occasion I could not resist the smug insolence of a Scotsman, and facing him I said: "Before going on, allow me an observation: You will recognize with me that, as England is taken as a whole and as a nation more advanced and cultured than Portugal or Albania, it cannot be tolerated that the most brute and the most uneducated of the English believes themselves superior to the most intelligent and cultured of the Portuguese or Albanians, is it not so? " And as the man agreed, I concluded: "Well then: you figure in England, because of the tests you are giving today, at the bottom of the culture scale, and I in Spain, I say it with the modesty that characterizes me, in the highest of it; so that we have concluded, because there is more distance from me to you than Spain to England, only in reverse order. "And this I think not a few Indians could say andvulgar little mesticillos (10) to the grave and cogolludos parents who despised them.

    Read on page 35 of this book how Rizal was in 1880 for the first time in the Malaca√Īang palace (11) for having been run over and wounded on a dark night by the Civil Guard, because he passed in front of a package and did not salute, and the bundle turned out to be the lieutenant commanding the detachment. And this event is related to Rizal's later translation into Tagalog of Schiller's play William Tell , in which Tell is arrested for failing to salute the stick on which the tyrant Gessler's hat crowned.

    All these humiliations hurt that sensitive and most delicate soul of the poet; He could not suffer the brutalities of the white and uncouth and not at all dreamer, of the Carrascos Samsons who fell over there, of those tough Spaniards covered with chickpea or borona.

    And Rizal's entire dream was to redeem, to emancipate the soul, not the body, from his homeland. All for the Philippines! He wrote to Father Pastells, a Jesuit, about the cause to whose defense he dedicated his talents: "The cane, when born in this soil, comes to support nipa huts and not the heavy masses of the buildings of Europe." A very delicate thought, the scope of which I doubt very much that Father Pastellas or any other Spanish Jesuit understood. And these were the best there ...

    Rizal never thought but of the Philippines; But neither did Jesus ever want to leave Judea, and told the Canaanite woman that he had been sent for the lost sheep of the kingdom of Israel only. And from that corner of the world, where he was born and died, he radiated his doctrine throughout the world.

    Rizal, the Philippine living consciousness, dreamed of an ancient Tagalog civilization. It is a natural mirage; it is the mirage that the legend of Paradise has produced. The same has happened in my Basque land, where there was also dreamed of an ancient Basque civilization, a patriarch Aitor and a whole fantastic prehistory drawn in clouds. They have even said that our remote grandparents worshiped the cross before the coming of Christ. Pure poetry.

    In this poetry I rocked the dreams of my adolescence, and in it that singular man, every poet, who called himself Sabino Arana, and for whom the time of full recognition has not yet arrived, rocked them. In Madrid, that horrid Madrid, in whose voice classes all the Spanish incomprehension is encrypted and summarized, he was taken as a joke or with rage, he was scorned without knowing him or he was insulted. None of the unfortunate follicular people who wrote anything about him knew his work, least of all his spirit.

    And I bring up Sabino Arana, ardent, poetic and dreamy soul, because he has an intimate kinship with Rizal, and like Rizal he died misunderstood by his family and others. And like Rizal filibuster, filibuster or something similar he was called Arana.

    They seemed even in details that are insignificant and that are, however, highly significant. If I were not afraid of taking this essay too long, I would say what I think it means for Arana to undertake the reform of the Basque or Basque spelling and Rizal that of Tagalog.

    And this Indian was educated by Spain and Spain made him Spanish.

    The Spanish

    Spanish, yes, deeply and intimately Spanish, much more Spanish than those wretches - forgive them, Lord, because they didn't know what they were doing! - who on his corpse, still warm, threw like an insult to heaven, that sacrilegious long live Spain !

    Spanish Yes.

    In the Spanish language he thought, and in the Spanish language he gave his teachings to his brothers; In the Spanish language he sang his last and most tender goodbye to his homeland, and this song will last as long as the Spanish language lasts; In the Spanish language, he left the Philippine Bible written forever.

    "Why are you coming now with your teaching of Spanish - says Simoun in El Filibusterismo - a claim that would be ridiculous if it weren't of deplorable consequences? less time! ...

    "On the contrary, replied Basilio; if knowledge of Spanish can unite us to the Government, on the other hand it can also unite all the islands with each other!"

    And this is the solid point of view.

    When the Romans arrived in Spain, at least as many languages ​​must have been spoken here as in the Philippines when my countryman Legazpi arrived there. Latin turned out to be a way for all Spanish peoples to understand each other, and Latin unified us, and Latin made the Homeland. And it could very well be that Castilian, Spanish, and not Tagalog, make the spiritual unity of the Philippines.

    In a recent letter from Manila the learned and cultured Filipino Mr. Felipe G. Calderón tells me: "Due to a contradiction that for you may not have an explanation and that for us is perfectly explainable, I am pleased to tell you that today He speaks (here) more Spanish than ever, and the reason is very clear, considering that currently the educational establishments have increased, based on Spanish; there is a greater movement of books and newspapers, since the previous censorship has disappeared, and the iron hand of the friar obstructed every attempt, every attempt to study Spanish.

    "You who have read the Noli me tangere can appreciate what was the obstructionist work of the friar against Castilian, by the chapter" Adventures of a school teacher "; and the famous Castilian Academy that is spoken in El Filibusterismo is a reality in which I took an active part and the then Director of Civil Administration, Mr. Benigno Quiroga Ballesteros.

    "The public schools are here organized on the basis of English; but their result is not so flattering for that language, since even the students in the official schools cultivate English and Spanish in parallel, since this is the social language, like Spanish. English is the official one and the dialect of each locality is that of the home.

    "To prove to you the little success that English achieves, the following information is sufficient for you: By the Civil Code of Procedures promulgated in 1901 it was established that from this year English would be spoken in the courts of justice; but in view of the fact that neither Philippine judges, lawyers, not even Supreme Court magistrates were in a position to accept such reform, a law has had to be passed extending the use of Spanish in the courts of justice for another ten years (12) .

    "The consequence of such a law is that the Filipino people have seen that without English they can also live and no efforts are made, as in the beginning, to learn the language."

    Castilian, the language of Rizal, is the social language of the Philippines. Is it not due to Rizal more than to any other man the preservation in the Philippines of this language, in which the best, the purest of our spirit goes? Instructive destiny that of our Spain! It begins to be truly loved and respected when it ceases to dominate. In all of her former colonies she is loved more and better when they no longer depend on her. Justice is served after his yoke is thrown off. So it has happened in Cuba, so in all of Spanish America, so in the Philippines. Is there two Spains?

    Since those who read this essay have read Retana's book before, it is useless to try to prove to them that Rizal loved Spain as his spiritual nurse, as his teacher, as the spiritual nurse of the Philippines, his homeland. He loved her with intelligent and cordial affection, and not with the blind and brutal selfish instinct of those wretches who threw the sacrilegious alive on the corpse of the great Tagalog.

    Rizal lived and was educated in Spain, and was able to meet other Spaniards than the friars and employees of the colony.

    All of Rizal's judgments on Spain are of a moderation, a serenity, a deep sympathy, an affection that could only escape the barbarians who intend, bolt in hand, to make us launch a long live Spain! without any content and that sprouts, not from the brain or the heart, but from the other organ, from which energetic volitions come out of the barbarian. Those poor unconscious people who feel cold in the back when they see the red and yellow flag waving could not understand Rizal's Spanishism. (And this because gualda and sword are consonants.)

    It is useless to insist on this.

    Retana says: "He was so Spanish, that from so much being so he derived his imponderable personal pride, without limits; he did not want to be less Spanish than the one who was more so. That is precisely why, for being so Spanish , he was judged" filibuster "."

    The filibuster

    We already have here the nickname, the chibolete 2 * ) .

    Let us hear from Rizal himself what he tells us in chapter XXXV, "Comments", of his Noli me tangere :

    "The white parents have called D. Crisostomo (13) plibastero . He is a worse name than tarantado (reckless) and saragata (14) , worse than betelapora , worse than spitting on the host on Good Friday. You already remember the word ispichoso , that it was enough to apply to a man so that the civilians of Villa Abrille would take him to the desert or to jail; for plibastiero [sic] is worse. According to the telegrapher and the director, plibastiero said by a Christian, a priest or a Spanish to another Christian like us, it seems santus deus with requimiternam ; if they call you once plibastiero , you can now confess and pay your debts, because you have no choice but to let yourself be hanged. "

    What a beautiful passage! How vividly does it show us that terrible power exercised by words where ideas are miserable or absent! That terrible plibastero or filibuster, like today the nickname of separatist, was a chibolete (15) , a mere word as empty of content as emptiness, long live Spain! with which one wanted and wants to fill the inanity of purposes.

    Retana is right; "If Rizal's enemies had seen the drawing that he made of his house in Calamba, and that he sent to Professor Blumentritt, they would have said that the drawing was also a filibuster !" (page 145). And he is right to add that Rizal's doctrines regarding the Philippines did not go any further than those of many Catalans and Basque people who are left, for today at least, to live in peace.

    It was the Spaniards, it must be said very loudly, it was above all the friars — the uncouth and incomprehensible friars — who were pushing Rizal into separatism. And things are repeating themselves today, and it is the rest of the Spaniards who are determined to propel Catalans and Basques towards separatism.

    Let's hear what a character from Rizal says in chapter LXI of Noli me tangere , that is, one of the several men that there were in Rizal. He says:

    "They have opened my eyes, they have made me see the sore and they force me to be a criminal! And since they have wanted it, I will be a filibuster, but a true filibuster; I will call all the wretches ... We, for three centuries, we reach out to them, we ask for love, we long to call them our brothers; how do they answer us? With insult and mockery, denying us even the quality of human beings. "

    And so Bonifacio, the winemaker, the non-intellectual, arrived and made the revolution.

    Filibuster! Read again on page 262 of this book what the press of the Metropolis, this miserable and incomprehensible press, one of the main causes of our disaster, said de Rizal. The same thing he said about Arana.

    Retana is right in saying that the separatist ideal itself is legitimate, as an ideal, in the Peninsula. You can discuss the Homeland; indeed, it should be discussed. Only by discussing it will we come to understand it, to be aware of it. Our misfortune is that Spain today does not mean anything to the vast majority of Spaniards, and a nation, like an individual, languishes and ends up perishing if it has no more spring of life than the mere instinct of self-preservation.

    The Spain of ¡long live Spain! The sacrilegious that launched itself on Rizal's corpse is the Spain of the exploiters, the brutes, and the imbeciles; the Spain of tyrannies and their slaves; the Spain of the caciques and the owners of large estates; the Spain of those who only live on the budget without any ideal.

    Rizal wanted to give content to Spain in the Philippines, and as there were plenty of friars and brutes to fill that content, Rizal was accused of filibuster.

    In the sad prosecutorial indictment against the great Spaniard and great Tagalog - I will deal with it shortly - it was said that Spain had plenty of breath and energy to not tolerate that the Spanish flag ceased to float in those regions discovered and conquered by fearlessness and fear. courage of our ancestors; and to these phrases, of detestable and pernicious rhetoric, Retana makes a very fair comment. The Philippine Islands, in fact, were not conquered with courage and intrepidity, but were won through persuasion and pacts with the indigenous rulers, with hardly any blood being spilled. "The general in chief of the conquest, " Retana adds, "was called Miguel L√≥pez de Legazpi, a kind and old clerk who in the days of his life drew the tizona."

    Yes; The Philippines were won for Spain by my countryman Legazpi —one of the most representative men of my Basque race, as he was also very representative of her, his and mine, Urdaneta (16) -; and he won them with his brain and not with the other organ from which not a few of the Pizarro-style conquerors have drawn their determinations, by sword and bar.

    Thus, with his brain, Legazpi, the kind Basque clerk, won them. And how did they get lost? Let's see it.

    Let's look at the Rizal process.

    The process

    Upon reaching this part of my work, a great sadness invades me, and at the same time the consciousness of the seriousness of everything I have to say. The facts that I am going to judge already belong to history, although most of the actors who intervened in them are still alive. For everyone I personally want the highest considerations. God and Spain will forgive them for what they did, in view of the fact that they did it without knowing what they were doing and acting, not as self-aware and autonomous individuals, but as members of a community, of a corporation maddened by fear. Fear and only fear, the degrading feeling of fear, fear and fear alone was the inspirer of the military court that sentenced Rizal.

    Retana says, speaking of the execution of Rizal, that "fortunately, Spain is not responsible for the mistakes made by some of her sons" (p. 188). I'm sorry to disagree with Retana here. I believe, in effect, that unfortunately Spain is responsible for that crime; I believe more, and I say it as I believe it: I believe it was Spain that shot Rizal. And he shot him out of fear.

    Out of fear, yes. It has been a long time since all the public mistakes, that all the public crimes that are committed in Spain, have been committed out of fear; For a long time, all of its corporations and institutes, beginning with the Army, have only operated under the pressure of fear. Everyone is afraid of being discussed, and to avoid it they hit when they can hit. And they hit out of fear. Out of fear Rizal was shot, just as out of fear the Army requested the abhorrent and absurd Jurisdiction Law, and out of fear Parliament voted for it.

    The indictment of Mr. Enrique de Alcocer y R. De Vaamonde is, like the opinion of the Auditor General Mr. Nicol√°s de la Pe√Īa, a shameful and deplorable thing. That is to say, they would be if these gentlemen had acted for themselves and before them, autonomously, and not as pieces of an institute and a society overwhelmed by fear. Retana has broken down the horrendous and misguided accusation of Mr. Alcocer.

    At the bottom of all this, nothing can be seen except fear and hatred of intelligence, fear and hatred very natural in the institute to which Messrs. Alcocer and Pe√Īa belonged. Retana says that shooting Rizal for the reasons why they shot him is as if in Russia they were trying to shoot Tolstoy. I think that good wishes are passed on to not a few. I know that when the process for the barbaric attack on the Lyceum was taking place in Barcelona, ​​years ago, the military judge who acted in it and had the collection of a magazine in which my colleague Mr. Dorado Montero, very prestigious, collaborated Criminalist, and I, allowed himself to be said: "These, these two gentlemen professors, I would like to catch and they would see what is good." If it had been in the Philippines, at this time my companion Mr.Dorado Montero and I would sleep the eternal dream of the martyrs of thought.

    The most terrible thing about the military jurisdiction is that it does not know how to prosecute; it is that the education that the military receives is the most opposite to that needed by those who have to have the office of judging. They sin, not out of malicious intent, but out of clumsiness, inability. And they sin sometimes by letter of more and others by letter of less.

    In any corporation, and especially in the Army, individual intelligence and independence of judgment come to be seen as a danger. The one who commands the most is the one who is most right. Discipline requires submitting personal criteria to hierarchy. Only at this price is the institute strengthened. And so in the Army, and, what is more, even in the Teaching Staff as a Corps, as its mission is to spread culture, individual intelligence is viewed with suspicion and even quietly hated. Known are the injunctions of the Holy Fathers to her; known is how much they have said about those who think they are wise. Intelligence, it is said, leads to pride; you have to submit your own judgment.

    And this, which is natural and excusable, since it starts from a beginning of life of every corporation or institute, this is aggravated when these institutes are in the form of rudimentary development. The less perfect a corporation, the greater the fear and hatred of intelligence that develops within it. And our army, as an army - as is our clergy, as clergy, and our faculty, as faculty - is in a very rudimentary state of development. Their collective intelligence is lower than the average of the individual intelligences that compose it, although this average is not very high, as it is not in Spain. But that their rudimentary collective intelligence has a certain awareness, albeit obscure, of its rudimentaryness, and tries to defend itself against corrosive individual intelligences.I doubt that there is an army in which it harbors more indifference, if not disdain, with respect to the individual intelligences that exist within it, as in ours, and I doubt that there is another in which so much worship is rendered to blind courage, to instinctive courage. There are legions of Spanish soldiers who would answer what is said, Prim replied to a foreign general who asked him how to do guerrillas; there are legions who, despite the lessons witnessed and not received, continue to believe that war is not made with the brain primarily, but with the other. And the other is not the value either. Because courage is more cerebral than testicular. And in any case it is cordial.and he doubts that there is another in which so much worship is rendered to blind courage, to instinctive courage. There are legions of Spanish soldiers who would answer what is said, Prim replied to a foreign general who asked him how to do guerrillas; there are legions who, despite the lessons witnessed and not received, continue to believe that war is not made with the brain primarily, but with the other. And the other is not the value either. Because courage is more cerebral than testicular. And in any case it is cordial.and he doubts that there is another in which so much worship is rendered to blind courage, to instinctive courage. There are legions of Spanish soldiers who would answer what is said, Prim replied to a foreign general who asked him how to do guerrillas; there are legions who, despite the lessons witnessed and not received, continue to believe that war is not made with the brain primarily, but with the other. And the other is not the value either. Because courage is more cerebral than testicular. And in any case it is cordial.They continue to believe that war is not made with the brain mainly, but with the other. And the other is not the value either. Because courage is more cerebral than testicular. And in any case it is cordial.They continue to believe that war is not made with the brain mainly, but with the other. And the other is not the value either. Because courage is more cerebral than testicular. And in any case it is cordial.

    And it is well understood that what I say about our army I apply mutatis mutandis to the other institutions, beginning with the one to which I belong.

    It is — it will be said to me — that war auditors, true lawyers, were involved in the Rizal trial! The lawyer who joins the military, to form part of the Military Legal Corps, as well as the other auxiliaries, assimilate the general spirit of the Corps. The uniform, narrow and rigid, can in them more than the wide robe.

    From the very day a warship is keel-fired in the shipyard, it has already been fully manned, and there the commander commands more than the naval engineer. A Navy doctor once said to me: "Do you believe that when a ship enters fire and has to play the artillery, the maneuver will be subject to what the artillery officer orders? Commander. And if it does not occur to them to heal the wounded or to say mass, it is because they disdain these functions. "

    And so in everything in the military. The combatants, those whose proper function is to fight, disdain the Auxiliary Corps; but these, the auxiliaries, always try to assimilate themselves to the former, although perhaps also disdaining them. That of disdain with disdain is a genuinely Spanish formula (17) .

    The lawyers who intervened in the Rizal process did so as soldiers, and as soldiers, influenced by those unfortunate friars and their like, dominated by fear.

    In the light of these extremely painful considerations, one must read the shameful accusation against Rizal, and the opinion and the report. It is true that Mr. Taviel de Andrade's defense is a document of serenity and judgment; but what obligatory shyness in her! There is, in any case, to save the defender; fear did not hold him so much.

    The poor auditor Mr. Pe√Īa entered judging the intellectual capacity of the accused, and this reminds me of the nonsense of the magistrate who, when acquitting Flaubert's Madame Bovary , entered judging of her literary merit, which that sovereign earned him stroke of the great novelist, who could not allow a vulgar magistrate to criticize from his seat of administering justice.

    It is natural that in the atmosphere of fear that existed in Manila in the days of the Rizal trial, it was difficult to escape the contagion. You have to read in this book how those who called themselves Christ's ministers preached extermination. It is their custom; They want to put faith, or whatever it is, in the heads of others by breaking them with a glass.

    I repeat that it was Spain that shot Rizal. And if I were told that here no longer is being shot for ideas and that here Rizal would not have been shot, I will answer that it is true, but it is because here we are closer to Europe. And Europe, furthermore, when it comes to abuses that a nation commits in its colonies, shrugs its shoulders, because which of its nations is free of this guilt? The ethics of a European nation is twofold and changes when it comes to colonies (18) .

    And all this was sanctioned by General Polavieja, whose mentality corresponded, according to my reports, to the rudimentary, to the rudimentary of the collective intelligence that, under the pressure of fear, issued that ruling.

    Rizal was sentenced to death; But there was still another act to be done, and that is that of conversion. The sword fulfilled its trade — a trade for which the sword is useless; The hyssop was lacking to fulfill his, a job also for which the hyssop does not serve.

    Let's look at the conversion (19) .

    The conversion

    Rizal, educated in Catholicism, never became, strictly speaking, a freethinker, but a freebeliever. To the Jesuits who visited him when he was in the chapel, he seemed a Protestant, and as a Protestant or a sympathizer of Protestantism, as well as a Germanophile, he was treated more than once.

    Among us Spaniards, there is hardly any idea what Protestantism is and means, and the Spanish Catholic clergy is most ignorant about it. There is nothing more absurd than the idea that a Spanish priest is formed from Protestantism, even of those who pass for enlightened. There are many who adhere to the book, so flimsy and poor, by Balmes, and who repeat Bossuet's famous and unfortunate argument.

    It helps to corroborate and perpetuate this concept what they hear from the orthodox Protestants they come across, from the Protestants with open chapels, from the pastors paid by some Bible Society, because the Protestant Orthodoxy is poorer and poorer, more rickety than the Catholic , and the superstitious cult that he renders to the Book, to the Bible, in its dead letter is lamentable.

    Just as there are those who do not understand that there are Darwinists more Darwinists than Darwin, so there are also those who do not understand or do not want to understand that there are Lutherans more Lutheran than Luther, that is, spirits who have brought out the specific principle of Protestantism, what differentiated him. and it separated from the Catholic Church, consequences that the first Protestants could not extract from it and even before which they recoiled. Because a doctrine that is separated from another has from this other that it is separated more than from itself, and in its beginning what Protestantism had in common with Catholicism was much more than its specificity and differential.

    Protestantism proclaimed the principle of free examination and justification by faith - with a concept of faith, be it well understood, different from Catholicism - and to a certain extent the symbolic value of the sacraments; but he continued to preserve almost all the non-evangelical dogmas, and among them that of the divinity of Jesus Christ, due to the work of the Greek and Latin Fathers of the first five centuries, that is, the dogmas of specifically Catholic formation and tradition. But the principle of free examination has brought free and rigorously scientific exegesis, and this exegesis, on a Protestant basis, has destroyed all these dogmas, leaving an evangelical Christianity standing, quite vague and indeterminate and without positive dogmas. Nothing represents this trend better than so-called Unitarianism - as can be seen, eg,in channing's sermons(20) - or a position like Harnack's (21) . And the orthodox Protestants, even narrower of criteria than the Catholics, exempt from this position, and forgetting what Saint Paul said about it, they persist in denying those of us who think so even the name of Christians.

    And in a position of this nature Rizal came to find himself, as I deduce from his writings. In such a position, not without a base of Hamletian hesitations and doubts, and always on a foundation of sentimental Catholicism, on a layer of his childhood. Because every poet carries his childhood very much to the flower of his soul and he lives on it.

    Rizal was considered a Protestant, and in the letter to Fr. Pastells that is inserted on page 105 of this work, he will be seen opening up about it and talking about his walks, in the solitudes of Odenwald, with a Protestant pastor. I do not believe, on the other hand, what the Jesuits say in their Rizal and his work that he had read "everything written by Protestants and rationalists and collected all their arguments." Do not exaggerate. The religious culture of Rizal was not, according to his own writings it is deduced, the ordinary one among us; but it was not extraordinary, far from it. It was not a dilettantein her. The examples cited by the Jesuits - see note (116) of this work - are most common and very early last century. Only that they were enough to make him a man very knowledgeable about Protestant and rationalist literature in the case of Spanish Jesuits, who in this they know even less than Rizal knew, with this being so moderate and sparing.

    The enormous, the shameful ignorance that reigns among us in this regard is what could have led to Rizal being considered a freethinker. No; He was a free believer, which is another thing. Rizal, I assure you, would not have sworn by B√ľchner or Haeckel.

    It is enough to read on page 292 of this book the ingenious and subtle way in which Rizal exposed the principle of the relativity of knowledge, to understand that he was not a dogmatic of rationalism, a theologian in reverse, but rather a free-believer with an agnostic sense and with a foundation of sentimental Christianity. And deep down, it should be repeated, the childish and popular Catholicism, not at all theological, of his childhood, the Catholicism of the former secretary of the Congregation of San Luis. I, who was also secretary of that same Congregation when I was fifteen, I think I know something about this.

    Rizal was considered a Protestant and a Germanophile, and we already know what this means between us. In Spain and for Spaniards, passing for a Protestant or something like that is worse than passing for an atheist. From Catholicism to atheism is easily passed; because, as Channing said, and precisely speaking of Spain, false and absurd doctrines have a natural tendency to engender skepticism in those who receive them without reflection, and there is no one as prone to believe too little as those who began by believing too much. It is common to hear in Spain declare that, if you are not a Catholic, you must be an atheist and anarchist, since Protestantism is a middle ground that neither reason nor faith supports. And when someone declares himself a Protestant, they believe him to be sold on English gold. The Protestant appears before us, even more than as an anti-Catholic,like an anti-Spanish. Atheism is even more authentic than Protestantism. Heresy is considered a crime against the fatherland as much or more than a crime against religion.

    And here was the occasion to say something about that sacrilegious confusion between religion and country, the unfortunate consortium between the altar and the throne - no less unfortunate than that other between the cross and the sword - and the disastrous consequences that it has brought so much for the throne as for the altar. Well, it is difficult to know if with such collusion the religion has lost more than the country or the latter more than the former.

    In note (387) corresponding to page 306 of this book, you will find a wonderful ukase (22) of the governor who was from Pangasinan, D. Carlos Pe√Īaranda, in which he orders the heads of the barangay (23)to hear mass on the days of obligation, under the fine of one peso if they do not do so. This was a brutal attack on the freedom and dignity of those Spanish citizens, and at the same time a manifest impiety. Because to compel a faithful Catholic Christian to fulfill the religious duties of his profession under civil sanction is nothing more than an impiety; It is to deprive that cult offering of its spiritual value and it is an attack on the freedom of the Christian conscience. If the friars who served as parish priests in Pangasinan had had a Christian and Catholic religious sense, they would have been the first to protest this attack.

    And then, read once again that deplorable one resulting from the deportation order of Rizal by General Despujol, the one resulting in which it is said that decatolizing was equivalent to denationalizing that always Spanish - today it is no longer so - and as such always Catholic Philippine land . The reading of such things saddens the spirit, and even more so to those of us who believe that in order to truly nationalize Spain, one of the things that is most needed is to decatolize it in the sense in which Despujol and his advisers and spiritual directors took Catholicism. Well, perhaps there is another sense in which it can be said that the Roman Catholic Church is being decatolized.

    Rizal passed for a Protestant, for a rationalist, for a freethinker, and in any case for anti-Catholic. And I am convinced that he was always a free-believing Christian, of vague and indecisive religious feelings, of much more religiosity than religion, and with a certain affection for the infantile and purely poetic Catholicism of his childhood. It would not surprise me that, even though I no longer believed with my head in Catholic dogmas, I had once attended Mass everywhere, and one who was born and raised Catholic can nowhere better than in a Catholic temple, outside of his own homeland, get the illusion of being in it.

    Rizal condemned to death, under the inspiration of fear his judges, his old teachers, the Jesuits, fell on him and tightened the fence with which they had long besieged him. It is a sad fight.

    Few things more instructive than poor Rizal's relationships with the Jesuits, his former teachers. In them one can see on the one hand his excellent good nature, his respect and gratitude to those his teachers who had treated him, and in general treated the Indian, with more humanity, with more rationality, with more Christian spirit than the friars. 3 * ) .

    And in them we can also see the irremediable vulgarity and vulgarity of the Spanish Jesuit, with his wardrobe wise men, with his diligent and useful wise men while trying to collect, classify and present news, but incapable of rising to a truly philosophical conception by their education. of things.

    In note (363) on p. 293 of this book, Retana says that although the Jesuits offered to publish the present one day, and he adds, I do not know if with irony: "We respect the reasons they have for keeping such curious letters unpublished." I, for my part, suspect that although Rizal's should not be an astonishment, far from it, of religious controversy - I have already said that I believe he never went beyond a dilettante in such matters as in others -, they should remain, nevertheless, the Jesuits are badly off. Because be careful if they are ignorant, vulgar and coarse in these matters when they are Spanish! Suffice it to say that a Fr. Murillo is walking around here who allows himself to write about exegesis and talk about Harnack and Abbe Loisy (24) , and he does so with a scholastic and a frightening insipience.

    There is no legend more foolish than the legend of Jesuit science, especially its religious science. They are even more detestable theologians and exegetes.

    Only a Spanish Jesuit like Father Pastells could think of giving Rizal the works of Sard√° and Salvany to try to convert him (25) . This gives the measure of his mentality or the poor concept that Rizal formed. He only needed to add those of Fr. Franco. And you have to read between the lines, in the story of the Jesuits, the nonsense and vulgarities that Father Balaguer should have dropped on poor Rizal.

    And so and with everything Rizal appears defeated, converted, and withdrawing. But not with reasons. Defeated, yes; converted, perhaps; but convinced, no. Rizal's reason did not enter at all in this work. It was the poet; He was the poet who saw death coming; He was the poet before the gaze of the Sphinx that was going to swallow him up very soon, before the terrifying problem of the afterlife; It was the poet who, at the sight of that image of the Sacred Heart, carved by his own hands in calmer days, felt that his childhood rose to the flower of his soul. It was the masterstroke of the Jesuits and was worth more than their all ridiculous reasons (26) .

    Poor Tagalog Christ had his olive grove in the chapel, and it is useless to imagine him as a heartless stoic. "I cannot control my reason!" Exclaimed the poor man before the siege of Fr. Balaguer. It yielded; signed the retraction. Then I would read the Kempis. He was before the great mystery, and poor Hamlet, the Tagalog Hamlet, must have said to himself: What if there is? In case there is! Then his spirit must have gone through a state analogous to that of that other great spirit, that of that man of very robust reason, but of feeling even more robust than his reason, who was called Pascal and who said: il faut s'ab√™tir , " you have to be brutalized "; and he recommended drinking holy water, even without believing, to end up believing.

    The account of Rizal's last moments, of his true spiritual agony, is very sad. "We're on our way to Calvary!" And on the way to his Calvary he went, perhaps thinking about whether his sacrifice would be useless; perhaps invaded by that tremendous feeling of the vanity of effort that has overwhelmed so many men on the verge of death.

    "What a beautiful day, Father!" I would no longer see days like this, so beautiful. The others would see them; but wouldn't they too die? Would the Philippines see beautiful, clear, clear days?

    "Seven years I spent there!" (27) And before his dreaming spirit seven years would pass meek and sweet, like the waters of a stream that runs in a valley of vegetables.

    "In Spain and abroad is where I got lost." What does it mean to get lost? The boy babbled into him.

    "I have not been a traitor to my country or to the Spanish nation!" No, he was not a traitor. It is Spain that was treacherous to him.

    "My great pride, Father, has brought me here." The arrogance! And who, who has a head on his shoulders and a heart on his chest, does not lose his pride? What is this arrogance? He who confesses himself proud has never been so. The others were arrogant, the arrogant were the barbarians who, as an insult to God, threw that sacrilegious one on his corpse. Long live Spain!

    "My pride has lost me!" This was said by the mind that corresponded to the hands that carved the image of the Sacred Heart, the mind of the child, the poet. And it was true. His pride, yes, he lost him so that his race could win, because everyone who wants to save his soul will lose it and whoever lets it lose will save it. His pride, yes, his holy pride, the awareness that an intelligent, noble and dreamy race lived in him, the pride of feeling equal to those whites who despised him, this saint, this noble pride lost him.

    In La Solidaridad of July 15, 1890, and in the article "A hope", Rizal wrote: "God has promised man his redemption after the sacrifice: man fulfill his duty and God will fulfill his!"

    Rizal fulfilled his duty, and the Independent Philippine Church, considering that God has fulfilled his, has canonized the great Tagalog: Saint Joseph Rizal.

    San José Rizal

    San Jos√© Rizal, and why not? Why should not the sanction of sanctity be given to the cult of heroes?

    I think one day to write something about that strange Independent Philippine Church (28) , whose publications I owe to the kindness of Mr. D. Isabelo de los Reyes (29) ; about that strange Church that is an attempt to dress Christian rationalism with Catholic symbols and ceremonies, and whose future seems very doubtful to me. It is not the thinkers who make religions or those who reform them. It seems to me easier that on the basis of the Christian Catholic sentiment that Spain left there, the cult of the homeland itself, the Philippines, should become a religion, and that it appears to them as a pilgrimage to another heavenly Philippines where Rizal encourages and lives in spirit.

    I do not know if Rizal, with his fine religious sense, and even in the absence of a great culture in this regard, would have approved a Church in which the hand of the schismatic priest can be seen, in which the footprint of the friar and his disciples can be seen.

    We must distrust the schismatic priest or the heretic or renegade priest. Even if he becomes an atheist, the priest wants to continue being a priest, and he wants there to be an atheist Church in which he continues as a priest. The religious reform sees it from his professional point of view.

    But whatever this may be, and whatever the naive rationalism of the Independent Philippine Church and its teachings, so naively agnostic and scientistic, it is the truth that he went on to canonize Rizal much more correctly than in other things. As all other things smell like European books, like volumes from the Alcan Library, and that, on the contrary, seems the flower of a spontaneous movement of the soul of a people. And religions are made by people and not by thinkers; the peoples with their hearts, and not the thinkers with their heads.

    Thus, the most transcendental act of the Independent Philippine Church is to have sanctioned the canonization of Rizal, promulgated by the Philippine people.

    Miguel from UNAMUNO.
    Salamanca, 19 and 20, V, 1907.

    Unamuno's Notes

    • (1 *) Perhaps there are many Filipinos who are unaware that Tennyson, in his poetry "To Ulysses" ( To Ulysses ), called the eastern Philippines Eden-isles .
    • (2 * ) In my workTres EnsayosI have explained what thischibolete is.
    • (3 * ) It should be noted that the Jesuits, although they do not surpass the members of the other religious orders in culture or enlightenment, but rather are more petulant than they and more ignorant, they far surpass them in education and good manners. They are usually recruited from other social strata.

    Editor's Notes

    1. Maragato - native of Maragater√≠a, region of the kingdom of Le√≥n. [N. of the E.]
    2. The Philippine League , an association whose purposes were to promote industry, commerce, and culture in the Philippines. Its members, mostly enlightened natives, pledged to help each other and protect themselves against the unjust practices of both the colonial government and religious corporations. [N. of the E.]
    3. Liberal politician who along with Sagasta was instrumental in the September 1868 revolution that ended the reign of Isabel II. [N. of the E.]
    4. Epifanio de los Santos, Filipino nationalist writer and politician, contemporary with Rizal. In the aforementioned note, he affirms that Rizal does not convert from a Tolstoy to a Calf, but to a Jesus Christ, the redeemer of his race. [N. of the E.]
    5. Leader and founder of the secret society, the Katipunan, who plotted the popular revolution of 1896 against Spain. He worked as a winemaker for an English company in Manila; He was described by Retana and others of the time as 'commoner' and 'illiterate'. [N. of the E.]
    6. The lines: "... to his adored homeland ... his lost Eden." They are taken by Unamuno from the last and most famous poetry written by Rizal on the eve of his execution, commonly known by the title - although the original did not bear a title - "My last goodbye." [N. of the E.]
    7. It says in the aforementioned pages of Retana's book: ... After these studies [Lippert, Hellwald and others] thought that their people were not an anthropoid people , as the Spaniards wanted to make us see, because they found that the faults and virtues of The Tagalogs were purely human, as he was convinced that the vices and virtues of a people were not peculiarities of the race, but acquired properties, on which climate and history have a powerful action.
      On this that he called 'practical popular art', he continued his studies, for which he observed the life of French and German villagers, since he said that the villagers are the ones who preserve the national and racial particularities for the longest time and are the that he could better compare with his countrymen, since most of them were made up of people from the country. With this attempt he retired for weeks and even months in quiet villages where he carefully observed the movements, attitudes and way of being of the villagers. The summary of his practical scientific studies summarized him in the following propositions:
      1) Human races differ in their outward habits and skeleton, but not in psyche. They are equally passionate; whites, yellows and blacks feel and are moved by the same pains; Only the forms in which these movements are externalized are different, but not even these are constant in the same race, in any people, but they vary by the influence of the most different factors.
      2) Races only exist for anthropologists; for observers of popular life, there are only social layers. Just as there are mountains that do not have the upper layers, so there are also peoples that do not have the upper social layers either; the lower ones are common to all peoples. Even in peoples where civilization is older, as in France and Germany, the main mass of the population is made up of a class that is on the same intellectual level as the main mass of the Tagalogs; they are only separated by the color of their skin, their clothes, and their language. But while the mountains do not grow in height, the towns gradually grow in higher layers. This growth is not, however, dependent only on the aptitude of the peoples, but also on luck and on innumerable other factors,easily recognizable.
      3) Not only colonial politicians, but even scientists believe that there are races of limited intelligence that will never be able to reach the level of Europeans. This, in RIZAL's opinion, is not true; for it says: with intelligence what happens with wealth: there are rich peoples and poor peoples, just as there are rich individuals and poor individuals. The rich man who thinks he was born rich is wrong; he has come into the world as poor and naked as his slave; what happens is that he inherits the wealth that his parents have hoarded. For with intelligence it happens that it is inherited in the same way: thus, peoples who, due to special circumstances, found themselves needed to do intellectual work, came to acquire their greater intellectual development, which was increasing, and being transmitted from one to another.The European peoples have found themselves in these circumstances: that is why they are so rich in intelligence; for they have not only been inherited from one another, but it has also been increased, by the necessary freedom and by advantageous laws, due to some directing spirits who left their intellectual wealth as an inheritance to their present successors.
      4) The unfavorable opinion that Europeans have of the Indians, has its explanation; But it is not fair. RIZAL based it as follows: weak people do not emigrate to exotic countries, but strong men, who not only take preventive lawsuits from their homes, but most of the time they believe they are obliged to exercise dominion over these people. It is known that people of color fear the brutality with which they are treated, and this, because they cannot reply stating their reasons, explains why they collaborate so badly with the work of the Spaniards. It must also be borne in mind that those of color most of the time belong to the lower layers of society: and therefore the judgment of the whites has the same value as that which an enlightened Tagalog of the French could form. and Germans, if he judged them by the shepherds, porters,etc., from these countries.

    8. Dr. Ferdinand Blumentritt, Austrian, ethnologist, linguist, Filipinist and best friend of Dr. Rizal. [N. of the E.]

    9. Small town on the large southern island of Mindanao where Rizal was relegated between 1892-1896. He requested to be sent as a doctor to Cuba and was traveling to Spain in September 1896 when he was arrested and sent back to Manila, to answer charges of sedition, since he had been implicated by members of the Katipunan as the leader of the movement. He was tried by a military court and shot on December 30, 1896. [N. of the E.]
    10. The friars referred to Rizal as a vulgar mesticillo or Chinese mesticillo . [N. of the E.]
    11. Palace where the governor general resided, today the presidential palace, located on the banks of the Pasig River in Manila. [N. of the E.]
    12. Until the 1930s, Spanish was the language of the courts and of Congress. Only after World War II could the definitive switch to English be made in the Philippines. [N. of the E.]
    13. Cris√≥stomo Ibarra, hero of Noli , is the son of a Spaniard and a Filipina. He returns to the islands after studying abroad for a long time and soon finds himself in trouble with the friars for creating educational projects and because he discovers that one of them was responsible for the imprisonment and death of his father. [N. of the E.]
    14. Tagalog, from the Spanish zaragate . In the Tagalog-English Dictionary of LJ English C.Ss.R. This word appears as "saragate" and not as Unamuno spells it here. [N. of the E.]
    15. In English, "shibboleth" means slogan, motto. [N. of the E.]
    16. Andrés de Urdaneta (1508-1568), Augustinian navigator and missionary who accompanied Legazpi on his expedition to the Philippines in 1564 (Little Illustrated Larousse, 1987).
    17. It is a double play on words that is related to the classic work, "El Desd√©n con el desp√©n", by the Spanish playwright Agust√≠n Moreto (1618-1669). According to Francisco Rico's analysis in 1971: "The fable or action is this: Carlos, Count of Urgel, in love with Diana, an extremely elusive princess and an enemy of love and marriage, judging it impossible to overcome his elusiveness by regular means of love and performance, he chooses to feign indifference and heartbreak, and with this trace he achieves his attempt, since Diana, surrendered to Carlos's feigned disdain, gives herself to party and gives him the hand of a wife ... The core of the plot : to teach that we only love the inaccessible and that only by pretending to be inaccessible will we obtain that they love us, to show that the best weapon to overcome a disdain is another disdain. " [N. of the E.]
    18. Things are changing and we dare to say that a d. Miguel would not be disappointed with the internationalization of justice and the role that his compatriots are playing in it with respect to the former colonies. [N. of the E.]
    19. On the eve of his execution Rizal wrote a retraction in which he abjured Masonry and returned to the Church. An hour before walking to the shooting site, he married his English mistress Josephine Bracken. Since the beginning of the 20th century, there has been controversy in the Philippines between Freemasons, who deny that there was such a retraction, and supporters of the Church. In the 1930s, members of the San Beda College of Law submitted the document (found in the Archdiocese of Manila after being misplaced for decades) to the analysis of calligraphic experts, who declared it authentic. [N. of the E.]
    20. William Ellery Channing (1780-1842), American theologian, founder of Unitarianism ( Great Larousse Encyclopedia , 1987).
    21. Adolf von Harnack (1851-1930), German Lutheran theologian. He was first a professor (1876), then a member of the Berlin Academy of Sciences (1890), the main representative of the rationalist critical school. "For him the essence of faith resides in piety towards God, like the attitude of Christ. He considers that the Christian is free to criticize dogma, which, according to him, is the intellectual translation of the Gospel, linked to a certain stage of historical development of thought, and influenced by Platonism and Aristotelianism "(Ibidem.).
    22. Ucase , unjust and despotic governmental order ( Dicc. Of Forgotten Words of little frequent use , E. Mu√Īoz, Madrid: Ed. Paraninfo sa, 1992).
    23. The barangay is equivalent to a neighborhood and the head of the barangay would have its modern counterpart in the president of the neighborhood council. In ancient times, the barangay was a rowing boat and tradition says that the islands were inhabited by waves of immigrants from Borneo, Indonesia etc., who traveled in these boats. They gave their settlements the same name and in the time of the Spanish a barangay was made up of "forty-five to fifty indigenous or mestizo families into which the peoples of the Philippines are divided" ( Little Illustrated Larousse , 1987). The ancient chiefs or datus were named barangay heads by the Spanish.
      Retana's note says: "The Governor of Pangasin√°n D. Carlos Pe√Īaranda addressed the following circular to the Governors of said province:
      'This civil Government being aware that most of the Barangay Heads of that town do not hear mass on days By precept, I hereby warn you that if from now on you cease to fulfill such a sacred duty, attending mass in community, then presenting yourself to the RC Parish Priest and meeting at the Tribunal to find out how many orders are related to the position you hold and Others that concern you, you will be incurred in a fine of five pesos for each offense incurred and one peso for each Head of barangay and for each time you stop attending mass without justified reason. Acknowledge receipt, and file it. —Lingay√©n, June 12, 1891.Pe√Īaranda . '
      "This document gives a perfect idea of ​​what men were transformed there. Pe√Īaranda, who has a place in the history of Spanish Literature, had distinguished himself in Puerto Rico for being excessively sympathetic to the islanders; he did not hide that he had been a 33rd degree Mason. nor his democratic ideals. And this man in the Philippines completely annuls all his antecedents to dictate the transcribed circular. But he did even more: he gave another one that caused the astonishment of all Spaniards ... in Spain: there was no lack of a Madrid newspaper calling him Pe√Īaranda I , by the circular that we reproduce below (which almost all peninsular newspapers reproduced):
      Civil Government of Pangasin√°n . - Governor of ...
      This Government has been observing, with the greatest surprise, that the natives not only do not greet the peninsular Spaniards that they meet on the public highway, but also that they do not pay that tribute of consideration and respect to persons constituted in authority, or that by their functions they belong to the Public Administration.
      Considering that this lack of respect also involves a reprehensible ingratitude on the part of the Indian towards the descendants of illustrious men, to whom they owe their moral and religious education and the benefits of their present civilization, and taking into account the faculties granted to me by the Article 610 of Title 5 of the Criminal Code in force in these islands, I have agreed to the following:
      1. Every Indian, whatever his class and social position, when meeting in the public highway with officials invested with an authority, be it governmental, judicial, ecclesiastical or administrative, will be discovered in proof of respect.
      '2.¬ļ In the same way, and as proof of consideration, it will be discovered by all the peninsular Spaniards.
      3. The offenders of this provision shall be punished with a fine of five pesos, or in the event of insolvency, with the equivalent subsidiary prison and destined to public works.
      4.¬ļ You will publish by bandillo, during three consecutive nights, in the dialect of the country, the prescriptions contained in this order for general knowledge.
      You will acknowledge receipt of this order, which you will file as indicated. - Lingay√©n, May 29, 1891. - Carlos Pe√Īaranda . '
      La Solidaridad , written by Indians (who in Madrid were not Indians , but Spaniards born in the Philippines), put this comment:
      'Let's see: it is ordered on the side that the Indian is discovered in the wake of all peninsular Spaniards as proof of consideration: why shouldn't the peninsular be discovered as the Indian passes, the latter being as Spanish as the former, and furthermore the Indian has the legitimate right to be at home, the peninsular being a pilgrim who, perhaps , far from providing welfare, exploits it? '
      "This was, after all, the good doctrine, which, naturally, the Filipinos in their country residents viewed with great pleasure the anger of the Governor, who had acted (needless to say) at the suggestion of the friars, without realizing that In Spain, the Indians could say what L√≥pez Jaena said in La Solidaridad on October 15 of the same year:
      'The Indians are no longer meek lambs that are taken to the slaughterhouse; they have a notion of their dignity and their right; they are men like the friars, like the Governor who dictated the party; and as men, they have known that compliance with the law does not consist in greetings or kissing hands , but in duly fulfilling their duties as a good Spanish citizen. ' (Synthesis of the doctrine supported by RIZAL.)
      "But there was still another Governor who went further than Pe√Īaranda. In La Solidaridad of March 15, 1894 it is read that upon taking over the civil command of one of the southern provinces of Luzon, a man Lieutenant colonel of artillery (he does not mention the name), addressed to the Governors a circular that read verbatim:
      'In taking charge of the command of this province, I warn you that the norm of my conduct will be to adhere at all to the provisions of the Laws and regulations in force, being inexorable for those who lack them, as well as secure support and guarantee to do justice.
      'You will keep the greatest attentions and respects with the reverend parish priests, the ONLY ones whom you will be able to teach and consult in the orders that you receive from this Government, without anyone else having to find out about them. '
      "Who was in charge in the country, the Minister or the friars? Who was the master ? Well then: the Indians who held good doctrine here, we called filibusters ; and the authorities who committed such imprudence there, were called distinguished patriots . "
    24. Alfredo Loisy (1857-1940) "French exegete who professed the absolute independence of biblical criticism and ecclesiastical history with respect to revelation and dogmas, conceiving a historical Christ different from the Christ of faith. In 1902, under the pretext of Refute The Essence of Christianity , by A. Harnack, published The Gospel and the Church , which was condemned by the Archbishop of Paris (1903). He was excommunicated in 1908, broke with the Church and was later professor of the history of religions at the College of France (1909-1933). Among his outstanding publications are: Pagan Mysteries and the Christian Mystery (1919) and Human Morality (1923) "(Great Larousse Encyclopedia, 1987).
    25. F√©lix Sard√° y Salvany (1844-1916) Spanish ecclesiastic. "... He enjoyed great fame as an integrist polemicist. For 43 years he directed the popular magazine, a Catholic weekly, and published numerous pamphlets, later collected in Catholic Propaganda (7 vols., 1803-1890). However, it was Liberalism is a Sin (1884), the greatest exponent of his fundamentalism, the work that caused the greatest controversies "(Ibid.)
      Integrismo: "Political-religious tendency of some Catholics who pretend to profess an integral Catholicism associating it with a conservative ideology. From the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th, and particularly during the entire modernist crisis, Catholics who wanted to show off their unreserved adherence to Catholicism used to give themselves the name of upright Catholics. Integrism has come to mean a kind of religious totalitarianism that seeks to extract only from faith the answer to all questions of private and public life, and that, consequently, denies the legitimate autonomy of the different spheres of life, subjecting them to the direct authority of the Church. Integrism, however, is more a temperament than a current. Its fundamental features are: uncompromising fidelity to the pontifical teachings;open struggle against naturalism, secularism, revolution and communism; certain moral puritanism "(Ibid.).
    26. Rizal at the age of 14 had carved the image of the Sacred Heart out of noble wood as a gift to one of his teachers who was returning to Spain, but it had stayed with him. The day before his death, one of the Jesuits who accompanied Rizal in the chapel brought him the image, leaving Rizal deeply moved. [N. of the E.]
    27. Rizal said while walking next to the walled city Intramuros, seeing the tower of the Ateneo de Manila church, where he was a student from 11 to 18 years old. [N. of the E.]
    28. Known in the Philippines as the "Aglipayan Church". Its founder, Gregorio Aglipay, was a Catholic priest who passed the revolutionary government and formed the Philippine church in August 1902. [N. of the E.]
    29. Filipino patriot and writer. [N. of the E.]


    WE Retana. Life and Writings of Dr. Jos√© Rizal . Madrid: General Library of Victoriano Su√°rez, 1907. [Illustrated edition with photogravures. Foreword by Javier G√≥mez de la Serna and Epilogue by Miguel de Unamuno. Digital edition and notes by Elizabeth Medina ]

    © Jos√© Luis G√≥mez-Mart√≠nez
    Note: This electronic version is provided for educational purposes only. Any reproduction for other purposes must obtain the corresponding permissions in each case.