Putang Ina 100: The Realism in Rizal

June 16, 2017

The Reproductive Health Law is now under scrutiny by the Supreme Court. Many
people, especially by the Church, have hailed it as a victory. After all, they
contest that the use of condoms, of Intra Uterine Devices, of birth control pills,
runs contrary to the principal maxim of God to Adam and Eve, for them to grow and
multiply. And grow and multiply we must. However, as the same maxim points out, the
humans of the earth can grow and multiply as long as the progenitors of the later
generation can feed them, clothe them, give them shelter and make them usable
members of the community. It is also in this point that supporters of the law would
point out making it a central counter argument to the opposition. The drama played
by the pro and the cons, the arguments, and even the threat of punishments closely
resemble that of the time when the idea of requiring the study of the life, works
and teachings of Rizal came into being: the spirit of which is slowly dying in an
age where forgetfulness is a bliss if not a blessing.

Putang Ina 100 as many students from the University of the Philippines would call
Philippine Institutions 100, the course code for the study of Rizal, reflects how
bleak our hero is received by the youth today. The question of who Rizal is absurd.
Everybody knows Rizal. He is in many household things. He is in every town and city
plaza all over the country. He is in the iconic monument marking the very place
where he became a martyr for our freedom. All of these accolades for our national
hero prompts an entirely new question: Why study Rizal? This is not a new question
as this is the very one asked by the hotly debated and very controversial law
making the study of Rizal mandatory in all levels of education.

It was Claro M. Recto who made many lives miserable a decade after the Second World
War. Recto made many enemies especially in the Church, who at that time, still has
a tight grip on almost everybody and on almost everything. The Church argued that
the use of the complete, unexpurgated version would be detrimental to the fledging
faith of the youth. Recto countered that this is unwise saying that Rizal should be
studied at the context of his work. Censoring his works would undermine the premise
of why Rizal should be studied in the first place. The Church threatened
excommunication. The supporters of the law took the threat in a stride. The Church
also threatened retribution on the next election but Recto, fought on, not minding
if the Rizal Law would be his last in the Senate during his time. Owners of private
Catholic schools threatened to close up shop. Recto took it lightly saying that the
government would just nationalize the schools. Many threats were made but this did
not deter Claro M. Recto from ensuring that the youth gets the opportunity of
knowing who Rizal is, what Rizal did for the country and why Rizal is considered
the country�s national hero.

This brings us to another question apart from the queries slated earlier: is the
Rizal Law still realistic? This question, by extension also asks: Is Rizal still
realistic? After all, many deify Rizal making him a larger than life figure. On
both questions, I�ll hazard a response. On both accounts, the answer is a yes.

Why?

1. The works of Rizal, like the works of many contemporary Filipino writers that
came before and after him, is timely and timeless. Classic yet relevant and
realistic: applicable then as it is useful now.

2. The study of Rizal is a pressing matter. It is a way for us to concretize our

quest to find our identity as a people and as a nation.

3. Rizal is a hero above all. He fought for freedom and for posterity. His writings
reflect what Filipinos felt before as they reflect our sentiments now.
In other words, making the study of the life and works of Rizal mandatory is
realistic and relevant. Rizal epitomizes what each of us really want: freedom from
the shackles of colonial rule and unity to bring us out of the quagmire of one
sided despotism caused by poverty, individualism and slowly deteriorating trust to
the institutions that may bond us if we so desire.

What makes the study of Rizal seemed unrealistic and difficult to reach is how
Rizal is presented in popular culture and more importantly with how he is studied
inside the classroom. Calling the course Putang Ina 100 reflects how poor Rizal is
discussed to the future of this country. Perhaps, we should not ask if the Rizal
Law is realistic. I, for one, attest that it is beyond any doubt. A more important
concern for us is the question of whether Rizal is taught in the context of how
real he is in the classroom and in the minds and hearts of the entire Filipino
nation. The drudgery of knowing Rizal and by and large the question of the
responsiveness of the Rizal Law as well as its concreteness all boils down to the
role of the teacher. The responsiveness and concreteness in the teaching of Rizal
will help break down the pedestal with which we place him. This pedestal prevents
us from knowing Rizal.

Rizal is human. At four feet eleven inches, Rizal is not a larger than life figure.
He is most likely dwarfed by the generation that came after him. What makes him
larger than life may be construed as the very reason why he seemed unreal and out
of reach. Rizal is real and the Rizal Law makes him even more real. Like many laws
of the land and like our Constitution, it is not a matter of policy, it is a matter
of making the policy work. Rizal right now is like the mandatory teaching of
Spanish in colleges and university. It is necessary in paper but foregone in life.
We have a choice. The choice is ours.