Rizal: A Man for All Times

Editor’s Notes: The following article was a speech delivered by Sir Allan Terrett, KR.

————

Rizal was truly an amazing man. Professor Blumentritt had said that a man of his stature only appears in the history of any nation, once every century. I don’t believe Australia has yet produced a man of his stature.

I will briefly review some of the areas in which he excelled, in his short life of only 35 and a half years.

He was:

    *      an anthropologist
    *      a botanist
    *      a businessman
    *      a cartographer
    *      a dramatist
    *      an economist
    *      an educator
    *      an engineer
    *      an essayist
    *     an entomologist,

While he was in Dapitan he used to send plant, animal and insects to Europe. (1) A rare frog which was named Rahpcophorus Rizali, (2)  A small beetle belonging to the species coleoptera, which was named Apogonia Rizali, and (3) A dragon fly which was named Draco Rizali.

He was a farmer

    *      a folklorist
    *      a geographer
    *      a grammarian
    *      a historian
    *      a horticulturist
    *      a humorist
    *      a lexicographer
    *      a linguist, He could speak with ease 22 languages, and in many was able to write letters and poetry.

He was

    *     a musician
    *     a novelist
    *    a painter
    *    a physician – including a specialist ophthalmologist
    *    a poet
    *    a philosopher
    *    a polemist
    *    a psychologist.

He was

    *    a satirist
    *    a sculptor
    *    a sportsman
    *    a sociologist
    *    a surveyor
    *    a traveller, and
    *    a zoologist;

but more than these a patriot, a hero and a martyr.

Some believe that Rizal is no longer relevant to the present day; because the circumstances and the tyranny of the times in which he lived have long since passed.

But I believe this is wrong. Rizal and his legacy are for all times, and all ages, and all classes of people.

I am a great believer that we should all have a hero in our lives, somebody to try to emulate; – and there is no better person to have as a hero, and to try to emulate, – than Rizal.

Rizal was a man who suffered

    *    hardship
    *    persecution
    *    poverty
    *   disillusionment
    *   sorrow.

We must remember that he was a man; made of flesh and bones just like us; – and though we may fall short of his example, we will be better for having been inspired by his example.

I believe that we who have children of Filipino background have an obligation to teach children about Rizal.

I believe that if we, and if we teach our children to try to emulate aspects of Rizal’s life, then this will raise ours; – and our children’s standards of:

    *   dedication to ideals
    *   dedication to study
    *   standards of morality, actions, behaviour, thinking, aims, and ethics
    *   respect for law, parents, other people, and country
    *   and to use our lives more productively.

I believe that the teachings of Rizal are very relevant today; he is a man for all times, and that if he becomes a role model for ourselves, and our children, then we, our community, and our country will be better for it.

*** Paper presented at “A Symposium on the Life and Works of Dr Jose P. Rizal” by the  Order of the Knights of Rizal, Sydney Chapter, on May 30, 1999 at the Bankstown RSL Club, Bankstown, NSW.

Manuel Luis Quezon, Father of Philippine National Language

It was on August 19, 1878, that this great Filipino patriot was born in Baler, Tayabas (now Quezon) – a ‘dreamy little town bathed in the glow of the morning sun.’ He was the son of Lucio Quezon and Maria Dolores Molina, a beloved and highly respected of their town.

At the age of five, young Manuel was taught by his mother how to read and write Spanish and learn the catechism. Two years later, he lived with the parish priest of Baler, Fr. Teodoro Fernandez, under whom he studied religion. Latin, geography and grammar. Even as a youth Manuel had demonstrated traits which were to remain with him as his assets when he became the leader of his people. He was endowed with aptitudes and qualities, such as great ambition and pride, earnest desire to learn, readiness to render service, a good sense of humour and lack of inferiority complex. He was besides being handsome, naturally gifted with a strong personality and the fine presence and tact.

At the age of eleven, young Quezon was brought to Manila by his father to study at San Juan de Letran. At Letran, he was awarded the degree of Bachelor of Arts in 1894 with the highest honors. In his study of law and jurisprudence in the University of Santo Tomas, he obtained again high scholastic honours along with Sergio Osme�a, his friend and rival, and with whom he later had a colourful political career.

At the time he was studying jurisprudence, the Revolution broke out. He laid aside his books and joined the forces of General Emilio Aguinaldo, and fought in the bloody battles of Tarlac, Pampanga and Bataan. Because of his bravery and heroism, he was promoted from second lieutenant to brigade captain and then to major. After the Revolution, he resumed his law studies and passed the bar, fourth place, in 1903. He had started a lucrative law practice in Manila and Tayabas when the Civil Government appointed him provincial fiscal of Mindoro and later, Tayabas, his native province. In 1905, he was elected Governor of Tayabas; and in 1907, first assemblyman from the same province to the First Philippine National Assembly.

In 1909, he was appointed Resident Commissioner to the United States. As a Commissioner, he obtained for the Philippines three important measures, namely, a Filipino majority in the Philippine Commission; the surrender of all legislative rights to the Filipinos by the creation of Philippine Senate; and the solemn pledge of independence for the Philippines by the Congress of the United States. For eight years he was a Resident Commissioner in the United States.

Despite a busy life, Quezon was not behind in bringing in a romantic chapter. It was at this time, when our gallant, generous and affectionate patriot sought the hand of his cousin, Aurora Aragon. Their romance culminated in a simple and unobtrusive ceremony in Hong Kong on December 14, 1918. Out of their happy successful wedlock, three children were born, namely: Zenaida, Maria Aurora, and Manuel, Jr.

At the end of his term as Resident Commissioner, he returned to the Philippines and became the President of the Philippine Senate. On September 17, 1935, he was elected first President of the Commonwealth of the Philippines. Having been re-elected in 1941, he assumed office at the outbreak of the Pacific War, and headed the Philippine Government-in-exile in the United States.

Death overtook Quezon in the midst of his war efforts in a foreign land. He died of tuberculosis on August 1, 1944, at Saranak Lake, New York. As a symbol of respect for President Quezon, the Americans caused his remains to be buried at Arlington Cemetery, in Virginia, where only American heroes lie. Two years later, the remains were brought to the Philippines and interred at North Cemetery, Manila.

Acknowledgment: This biography is from the files of the National Historical Institute, Manila, and contributed to emanila.com by Renato Perdon. We have retitled the file “Manuel L. Quezon (1878-1944)” to “Manuel L. Quezon – Ama ng Wikang Pambansa” on the occasion of Linggo ng Wika, August 2002.

The Making of a National Language

Editor’s Notes: The following article is written by Renato Perdon.

—————

A clear proof the cultural diversity of the Filipinos is the number of languages and dialects spoken in the Philippines, from Batanes in the North to Jolo in the South.

This language diversity is one of the reasons why it took more than three centuries, after the arrival in the Philippines of the Europeans in the 16th century, for Filipinos to become a cohesive integrated national community.

The religious missionaries took it upon themselves to learn and master the native dialects instead of teaching the natives to speak in Spanish.

In the case of the Americans, it was opposite. Believing that a single language is the key to any colonisation scheme, Filipinos were forced to learn American English.

The language problem in the Philippines was recognised only in the 1930s. It took a politician who later became the country’s president, Manuel L. Quezon, a Tagalog speaker from Baler, Tayabas, now Quezon Province, to push the idea of a single language for the Filipinos.

During the 1935 Constitutional Convention, it was Quezon who worked hard for the inclusion of a provision that would require the development of a national language for the Filipinos.

Initially, Tagalog ( note: a dialect which was the lingua franca of Manila)  was proposed as the national language but the non-Tagalog speakers, mainly from the Province of Cebu, objected and the word Tagalog was deleted and replaced by a phrase “one of the existing native languages”.

Thus, the Philippine Constitution provides “Congress shall take steps towards the development and adoption of a common national language based on one of the existing native languages.”… English and Spanish would continue as official languages of the country.  In pursuance of this mandate, the National Assembly, the lawmaking body of the Philippines at that time, created the Institute of National Language (INL) to study which among the native languages could be developed and adopted as the national language of the Philippines. The INL was composed of a chairman and members representing the major native languages of the Philippines such as Iloco, Pangasinan, Ibanag, Pampango, Tagalog, Bikol, Hiligaynon (Ilonggo), Cebuano, Samar-Leyte and Magindanaw.

Jaime C. de Veyra, scholar, historian and politician, who hailed from the Province of Leyte became the Chairman of the INL. In 1937, the Institute recommended to Congress the adoption of Tagalog as the basis of developing a national language. Subsequently, President Quezon proclaimed the national language of the Philippines based on the Tagalog dialect.

The development of the national language of the Philippines was slow. According to historian Onofre D. Corpuz, by 1960 only 44.5% of the population spoke Pilipino, the official name of the national language, although this was better than the 39.5% for English and 25% for Spanish. This slow development was due to the fact that while Pilipino was being taught in school, it was not used as a medium of instruction, compared to English which was taught as if it was a native language.

The use of Pilipino, based on Tagalog, as one of the media of instruction in all schools in the Philippines, gained momentum in the 1970s when a a bilingual policy in education was adopted by the National Board of Education…. The policy, among other things, provided for the gradual introduction on all levels, starting in 1973, of Pilipino as the medium of instruction in certain subjects like the social sciences, practical arts and physical education. However, English was retained as the medium of instruction in mathematics and the sciences.

While Pilipino was gaining a headway as a national language with many Filipinos becoming conversant in the language, arguments against it continued. During the 1971 Constitutional Convention which revised the 1935 Philippine Constitution, the language issue was one of the heated subjects that dominated the many conferences and meetings attended by the delegates.

As completed, the 1973 Constitution of the Philippines incorporated a much clearer policy on the issue. It stated that “the National Assembly shall take steps towards the development and formal adoption of a common national language to be known as Pilipino.”  Moreover, it was also mandated that the fundamental law be “officially promulgated in English and Pilipino.”

The wider use of Pilipino during the People’s Power Revolution in 1986 added credibility to the national language…. the Aquino sponsored Provisional Constitution, also known as “Freedom Constitution” …issued on 25 March 1986… was ordered published in English and Pilipino.

… In the past, the subject of a national language only worth a few lines in the fundamental law of the land. However, in the 1987 Constitution, a separate part titled “Language”, with four sections devoted solely on the subject of national language, is incorporated.

Approved in a nationwide plebiscite on 2 February 1987, Filipino became the new name of the national language of the Philippines and the government was enjoined “to initiate and sustain the use of Filipino as a medium of official communication and as a language of instruction in the educational system.”

The Constitution also mandated the creation of the Commission on Filipino Language (CFL) which will undertake, coordinate, and promote research for the development, propagation, and preservation of Filipino and other languages.

** This article is an extract from the author’s book, English Filipino Wordbook.  / webmaster rc 010899 – Emanila Team

To the Young Women of Malolos

This famous letter was written by Jose Rizal in Tagalog, while he was residing in London, upon the request of M. H. del Pilar. The story behind this letter is that on December 12, 1888, a group of twenty young women of Malolos petitioned governor-general Weyler for permission to open a “night school” so that they might study Spanish under Teodoro Sandiko. The Spanish parish priest, Fr. Felipe Garcia, objected so that the governor-general turned down the petition. However, the young women, in defiance of the friar’s wrath, bravely continued their agitation of the school, a thing unheard of in the Philippines in those times. They finally succeeded in obtaining government approval to their project on condition that Señorita Guadalupe Reyes should be their teacher. The incident caused a great stir in the Philippines and in far-away Spain. Del Pilar, writing in Barcelona on February 17, 1889, requested Rizal to send a letter in Tagalog to the brave women of Malolos. Accordingly, Rizal, although busy in London annotating Morgan’s book, penned this famous letter and sent it to Del Pilar on February 22, 1889 for transmittal to Malolos.
To the Young Women of Malolos
(London, February 22, 1889)

When I wrote Noli Me Tangere, I asked myself whether bravery was a common thing in the women of our people. I brought back to my recollection and reviewed those I had known since my infancy, but there were only few who seem to come up to my ideal. There was, it is true, an abundance of girls with agreeable manners, beautiful ways, and modest demeanor, but there was in all an admixture of servitude and deference to the words or whims of their so-called “spiritual fathers” (as if the spirit or soul had any father other than God), due to excessive kindness, modesty, or perhaps ignorance. They seemed faded plants sown and reared in darkness, having flowers without perfume and fruits without sap.

However, when the news of what happened at Malolos reached us, I saw my error, and great was my rejoicing. After all, who is to blame me? I did not know Malolos nor its young women, except one called Emilia, and her I knew by name only.

Now that you�ve responded to our first appeal in the interest of the welfare of the people; now that you have set an example to those who, like you, long to have their eyes opened and be delivered from servitude, new hopes are awakened in us and we now even dare to face adversity, because we have you for our allies and are confident of victory.

No longer does the Filipina stand with her head bowed nor does she spend her time on her knees, because she is quickened by hope in the future; no longer will the mother contribute to keeping her daughter in darkness and bring her up in contempt and moral annihilation. And no longer will the science of all sciences consist in blind submission to any unjust order, or in extreme complacency, nor will a courteous smile be deemed the only weapon against insult or humble tears the ineffable panacea for all tribulations. You know that the will of God is different of that of the priest; that religiousness does not consist of long periods spent on your on your knees, nor in endless prayers, big rosarios, and grimy scapulars, but in spotless conduct, firm intention and upright judgement.

You also know that prudence that does not consist in blindly obeying any whim of the little tin god, but in obeying only that which is reasonable and just, because blind obedience is itself the cause and origin of those whims, and those guilty of it are really to be blamed. The official or friar can no longer assert that they alone are responsible for their unjust orders, because God gave each individual reason and a will of his or her own to distinguish the just from the unjust; all were born without shackles and free, and nobody has a right to subjugate the will and the spirit of another. And why should you submit to another your thoughts, seeing that thought is noble and free?

It is cowardice and erroneous to believe that saintliness consists in blind obedience and that prudence and the habit of thinking are presumptuous. Ignorance has ever been ignorance, and never prudence and honor God, the primal source of all wisdom, does not demand that man, created in his image and likeness, allow himself to be deceived and hoodwinked, but wants us to use and let shine in the light of reason with which He has so mercifully endowed us. He may be compared to the father who gave each of his sons a torch to light their way in the darkness bidding them keep its light bright and take care of it, and not put it out and trust to the light of the others, but to help and advice each other to find the right path. They would be madmen were they to follow the light of another, only to come to a fall, and the father could unbraid them and say to them: “Did I not give each of you his own torch,”, but he could not say so if the fall were due to the light of the torch of him who fell, as the light might have been dim and the road very bad.

The deceiver is fond of using the saying that “It is presumptuous to rely on one�s own judgment,” but, in my opinion, it is more presumptuous for a person to put his judgment above that of the others and try to make it prevail over theirs. It is more presumptuous and even blasphemous for a person to attribute every movement of his lips to God, to represent every whim of his as the will of God, and to brand his own enemy as an enemy of God. Of course, we should not consult our own sense that is most reasonable to us. The wild man from the hills, if clad in a priest�s robe, remains a hillman and can only deceive the weak and ignorant. And, you will be lucky if the carabao does not become lazy on account of the robe. But I will leave this subject to speak of something else.

Youth is a flower-bed that is to bear rich fruit and must accumulate wealth for its descendants. What offspring will be that of a woman whose kindness of character is expressed by mumbled prayers; who knows nothing by heart but awits, novenas, and the alleged miracles; whose amusements consists in playing panguingue or in the frequent confession of the same sins? What sons will she have but acolytes, priest�s servants, or cockfighters? It is the mothers who are responsible for the present servitude of our compatriots, owing to the unlimited trustfulness of their loving hearts, to their ardent desire to elevate their sons. Maturity is the fruit of infancy and the infant is formed on the lap of its mother. The mother who can only teach her child how to knell and kiss hands must not expect sons with blood other than of vile slaves. A tree that grows in the mud is unsubstantial and good only for firewood. If her son should have a bold mind, his boldness would be deceitful and will be like the bat that cannot show itself until the ringing of the vespers. They say that prudence is sanctity. But, what sanctity have they shown us? To pray and kneel a lot, kiss the hand of the priests, throw money away on churches, and believe all the friar sees fit to tell us; gossip, callous rubbing of noses�

As to the gifts to God, is there anything in the world that does not belong to God? What would you say of a servant making his master a present of a cloth borrowed from that very master? Who is so vain, so insane that he will give alms to God and believe that the miserable thing he has given will serve to clothe the Creator of all things? Blessed be they who succor their fellow men, aid the poor and feed the hungry; but cursed be they who turn s dead ear to supplications of the poor, who only give to him who has plenty and spend their money lavishly on silver altar hangings for the thanksgiving, or in serenades and fireworks. The money ground out of the poor is bequeathed to the master so that he can provide for chains to subjugate, and hire thugs and executioners. Oh, what blindness, what lack of understanding!

Saintliness consists in the first place in obeying the dictates of reason, happen what may. “It is acts and not words that I want of you,” said Christ. “Not everyone that sayeth unto me, Lord, Lord shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in Heaven.” Saintliness does not consist in abjectness, nor is the successor of Christ to be recognized by the fact that he gives his hand to be kissed. Christ did not give the kiss of peace to the Pharisees and never gave His hand to be kissed. He did not cater to the rich and vain; he did not mention scapularies, nor did he make rosaries, or solicit offerings for the sacrifice of the mass or exact payments for His prayers. Saint John did not demand a fee on the River Jordan, nor did Christ teach for gain. Why, then, do the friars now refuse to stir a foot unless paid in advance? And, as if they were starving, they sell scapularies, rosaries, bits, and other things which are nothing but schemes for making money and detriment to the soul; because even if all the rags on earth were converted into scapularies and all the trees in the forest into rosaries, and if the skins of all the beasts were made into belts and if all the priests of the earth mumbled prayers over all this and sprinkled oceans of holy water over it, this would not purify a rogue or condone sin where there is no repentance. Thus, also, through cupidity and love of money, they will, for a price, revoke the numerous prohibitions such as those against eating meat, marrying close relatives, etc. you can do almost anything if you but grease their palms. Why that? Can God be bribed and bought off, and blinded by money, nothing more nor less than a friar? The brigand who has obtained a bull of compromise can live calmly on the proceeds of his robbery, because he will be forgiven. God, then, will at a table where theft provides the viands? Has the omnipotent become pauper that He must assume the role of the excise man or gendarme? If that is the God whom the friar adores, then I turn my back upon that God.

Let us be reasonable and open our eyes, especially you women, because you are the first to influence the consciousness of man. Remember that a good mother does not resemble the mother that the friar has created; she must bring up her child to be the image of the true God, not of a blackmailing, a grasping god, but of a God who is the father of us all, who is just; who does not suck the life-blood of the poor like a vampire, nor scoffs at the agony of the sorely beset, nor makes a crooked path of the path of justice. Awaken and prepare the will of our children towards all that is honorable, judged by proper standards, to all that is sincere and firm of purpose, clear judgement, clear procedure, honesty in act and deed, love for the fellow man and respect for God; this is what you must teach to your children. And, seeing that life is full of thorns and thistles, you must fortify their minds against any stroke of adversity and accustom them to danger. The people cannot expect honor nor prosperity so long as they will educate their children in a wrong way, so long as the woman who guides the child in his steps is slavish and ignorant. No good water comes from a turbid, bitter spring; no savory fruit comes from acrid seed.

The duties that woman has performed in order to deliver the people from suffering are of no little importance, but be they may, they will not be beyond the strength and stamina of the Filipino people. The power and good judgment of the woman of the Philippines are well known, and it is because of this that she has been hoodwinked, and tied, and rendered pusillanimous; and now her enslavers rest at ease, because so long as they can keep the Filipina mother a slave, so long they will be able to make slaves of her children. The cause of the backwardness of Asia lies in the fact that there the women are ignorant, are slaves, while Europe and America are powerful because there the women are free and well educated and endowed with lucid intellect and string will.

We know that you lack instructive books; we know that nothing is added to your intellect, day by day, save that which is intended to dim its natural brightness; all this we know, hence our desire to bring you the light that illuminates your equals here in Europe. If that which I tell you does not provoke your anger, and if you will pay a little attention to it then, however dense the mist may that befogs our people, I will make the utmost efforts to have it dissipated by the bright rays of the sun, which will light, though they may be dimmed. We shall not feel any fatigue if you help us: God, too, will help to scatter the mist, because he is the God of truth; He will restore to its pristine condition the fame of the Filipina in whom we now miss only a criterion of her own, because good qualities she has enough and to spare. This is our dream; this is the desire we cherish in our hearts; to restore the honor of a woman, who is half of our heart, our companion in the joys and tribulations of life. If she is a maiden, young man should love her not only because of her beauty and her amiable character, but also on account of her fortitude of mind and loftiness of purpose. Which quicken and elevate the feeble and timid and ward off all vain thoughts. Let the maiden be the pride of her country and command respect, because it is a common practice on the part of the Spaniards and friars here who have returned from the Islands to speak of the Filipina as complaisant and ignorant, as if it should be thrown into the same class because of the missteps of a few, and as if women of weak character did not exist in other lands. As to purity what could the Filipina not hold up to others!

Nevertheless, the returning Spaniards and friars, talkative and fond of gossip, can hardly find time enough to brag and bawl, amidst guffaws and insulting remarks, that a certain women was thus; that she behave thus at the convent and conducted herself thus with the Spaniards who on the occasion was her guest, and other things that set your teeth on edge when you think of them which, in the majority of cases, were faults due to candor, excessive kindness, meekness or perhaps ignorance and were all the work of the defamer him self. There is a Spaniard now in high office, who has sat at our table and enjoy our hospitality in his wanderings through the Philippines and who upon his return to Spain, rushed worth with into-print and related that on one occasion in Pampanga he demanded hospitality and ate, and slept at the house and the lady of the house conducted herself in such and such a manner with him; this is how he repaid the lady for her supreme hospitality! Similar insinuation are made to the friars to the chance visitor from Spain concerning their very obedient confesandas, hand-kissers, etc., accompanied by smiles and very significant wingkings of the eyes. In a book published by D. Sinibaldo de Mas and in other friar sketches sin are related of which women accused themselves of the confessional and of which the friar made no secret in talking to their Spanish visitor seasoning them, at the best, with idiotic and shameless tales not worthy of credence. I cannot repeat here the shameless stories that a friar told Mas and to which Mas attributed no value whatever. Everytime we hear or read anything of this kind, we ask each other: Are the Spanish women all cut after the pattern of the Holy Virgin Mary and the Filipinas all reprobates? I believe that If we are to balance accounts in this delicate question, perhaps� But I must drop the subject because I am neither a confessor nor a Spanish traveler and have no business to take away anybody�s goodname. I shall let this go and speak of the duties of women instead.

A people that respect woman, like the Filipino people, must know the truth of the situation in order to be able to do what is expected of it. It seems an established fact that when a young student falls inlove, he throws everything to the dogs � knowledge, honor and money, as if a girl could not do anything but sow misfortune. The bravest youth becomes a coward when he married and the born coward becomes shameless, as if he had been waiting to get married in order to show his cowardice. The son, in order to hide his pusillanimity, remembers his mother, swallows his wrath, suffers his ears to be boxed, obeys the most foolish orders, and become an accomplice to his own dishonor. It should be remembered that where no body flees there is no pursuer; when there is no little fish, there can not be a big one. Why does the girl not require of her lover a noble and honored name, a manly heart offering protection to her weakness, and high spirit incapable of being satisfied with engendering slaves? Let her discard all fear, let her behave nobly and not deliver her youth to the weak and faint-hearted. When she is married, she must aid her husband, inspire him with courage, share his perills, refrain from causing him worry and sweeten her moments of affliction, always remembering that there is no grief that a brave heart can not bear and there is no bitterer inheritance than that of infamy and slavery. Open your children�s eyes so that they may jealousy guard their honor, love their fellowmen and their native land, and do their duty. Always impress upon them they must prefer dying with honor to living in dishonor. The women of Sparta should serve you as an example in this; I shall give some of their characteristics.

When a mother handed the shield to her son as he was marching to the battle, she said nothing to him but this: “Return with it, or on it,” which mean, come back victorious or dead, because it was customary with the routed warrior to throw away his shield, while the dead warrior was carried home on his shield. When a mother received word that that her son had been killed in battle and the army routed, she did not say a word, but expressed her thankfulness that her son returned alive and the mother put on mourning. One of the mothers who went out to meet the warriors returning to battle asked if if her three sons had been victorious or not. We have been victorious � answered the warrior. If that is so, then let us thank God, and she went to the temple.

Once upon a time a king of theirs, who had been defeated, hid in the temple, because he feared the popular wrath. The Spartans resolved to shut him up there and starve him to death. When they were blocking the door, the mother was the first to bring the stones. These things were in accordance with the custom there, and all Greece admire the Spartan woman. Of all women � a woman said jestingly � only you Spartans have power over the men. Man, the Spartan women said, was not born to live life for himself alone but for his native land. So long as this way of thinking prevailed and they had that kind of women in Sparta, none was there a woman in Sparta who ever saw a hostile army.

I do not expect to be believed simply because it is I who am saying this; there are many people who do not listen to reason, but will listen only to those who hear the cassock or have gray hair or no teeth; but while it is true that the aged should be venerated, because of their travails and experience, yet the life I have lived, consecrated to the happiness of the people, add some years, though not many of my age. I do not pretend to be looked upon as an idol or fetish and to be believed and listened to with the eyes closed, the head bowed, and the arms crossed over the breast; what I ask of all is to reflect on what I tell him, think it over and sift it carefully through the sieve of reason.

First of all. That the tyranny of some is possible only through cowardice and negligence on the part of others.

Second. What makes one contemptible is lack of dignity and object fear of him who holds one in contempt.

Third. Ignorance is servitude, because as a man thinks, so he is; a man who does not think for himself and allowed himself to be guided by the thought of other is like the beast led by a halter.

Fourth. He who loves his independence must first aid his fellowman, because he who refuses protection to others will find himself without it; the isolated rib of the buri palm is easily broken, but not so the broom made of the ribs of the palm bound together.

Fifth. If the Filipina will not change her mode of being, let her rear no more children, let her merely give birth to them. She must cease to be the mistress of the home, otherwise she will unconsciously betray husband, child native land, and all.

Sixth. All men are born equal, naked, without bonds. God did not create man to be a slave; nor did he endow him with intelligence to have him hoodwinked, or adorn him with a reason to have him deceived by others. It is not fatuous to refuse to worship one�s equal, to cultivate one�s intellect, and to make use of reason in all things. Fatuous is he who makes a god of him, who makes brutes of others, and who strives to submit to his whims all that is reasonable and just.

Seventh. Consider well that kind of religion that they are teaching you. See whether it is the will of the God or according to the teachings of Christ that the poor be succored and those who suffer alleviated. Consider what they are preaching to you, the object of the sermon, what is behind the masses, novenas, rosaries, scapularies, images, miracles, candles, belts, etc., etc.; which they daily keep before your minds; ears and eyes; jostling, shouting, and coaxing, investigate whence they came and whether they go and then compare that religion with the pure religion of Christ and see whether the pretended observance of the life of Christ does not remind of the fat mik cow or the fattened pig, which is encouraged to grow fat not through love of the animal, but not grossly mercenary motives.

Let us, therefore, reflect and consider our situation and see how we stand. May these poorly written lines aid you in your good purpose and help you to pursue the plan you have initiated. “May your profit be greater than the capital investment,” and I shall gladly accept the usual reward of all who dare the people the truth. May your desire to educate yourself be crowned with success; may you in the garden of learning gather not bitter, but choice fruit, looking well before you eat because on the surface of the globe all is deceit, and the enemy sows weeds in your seedling plot.

All this is the ardent desire of your compatriot.

JOSE RIZAL
*** Reprinted from the Jose Rizal web site, www.joserizal.ph, for the benefit of emanila.com users. For clarity, changes to the text and layout had been made to the original Jose Rizal web site publication. Posted: Dec 17, 2002, emanila*pilipino

The vibrancy of Filipino as a language

What is Internet in Tagalog?

We mentioned to all emanila.com members and users that our online translation service is not in Tagalog but in Filipino (Pilipino).

It has now become obvious from Mr Renato Perdon’s “The Making of a National Language” why it is so. While Tagalog is the basis of the development of Pilipino (now Filipino) in the 70s, the fact still remains that the latter is a language on its own. The two are distinct and different from each other.

Tagalog still remains Tagalog. Filipino (Pilipino) on the other hand consists of words integrated from the various Philippine dialects as well as from foreign languages.

For example, consider the following figures:

Based on Mr Perdon’s research, the official dictionary issued in 1991 by the Commission on Filipino Language had about 55% of the words integrated into Filipino coming from the major dialects in the Philippines, namely: Bicol (301 words), Cebuano (526 words), Hiligaynon (564 words), Ilocano (122 words), Kapampangan (51 words), Pangasinan (82 words), Old Tagalog / Tagalog (8,463 words), and Samar-Leyte (459 words).

There are also 328 Tausug words, 222 words from the Maranao dialect, 99 words from Maguindanao, 23 words from Samal, 16 words from the Tingian, 12 words from Isneg and another 12 words from Tagbanua.

On the influence of foreign languages, Mr Perdon has also reported that:

Spanish words account for 5,210 words followed by English (1,907), Chinese (232), Malay (176 words), Latin (70), French (46), Sanskrit (29), Arabic (28), German (25), Mexican (20), and Japanese (13).

There are also 7 words each from the Indonesian and Italian languages, 2 words each from the Argentinian, Australian, Hawaiian, Javanese and Swish languages. One word each came from Aztec, Czechoslovakian, Finish, Greek, India, and Russian languages.

Such is the vibrancy and dynamism of Filipino as a language. We will not be surprised if these days, the number of English words have increased. For how do you translate the contemporary words, especially those related to the Internet and other areas of information technology, in Filipino?

Has anyone started looking for the exact equivalent of the following common words: Internet, modem, web site, browser, email, upload, download, hyperlink, toolbar?

We will not be surprised to know that in Tagalog there are none! But in Filipino there are. The equivalent words are the native words — except that these are spelled in a manner that is distinctly Filipino! Example? Try web sayt for web site, brawser for browser, and tulbar for toolbar.

(This article was originally posted Dec 3, 2002 at emanila*plaza, emanila*pilipino)

Romy Cayabyab is the publisher of emanila.com