Yes, Rizal is a Maharlikan

Rizal, A Maharlikan

In the previous article, Jose Rizal, A Maharlikan? the name Jose Rizal was dissected from its etymological origin to reveal its esoteric meaning for the sake of obtaining a deeper purview of the hidden personality of Rizal himself through his name which for some reasons steered debates why he choose Rizal instead of his family’s surname, Mercado. The result was astounding revealing that both Jose and Rizal are implying supernal attributes proving that by the name alone has something hidden beyond the extra-ordinary. Of course that is only half true for those who avowed their deeper inclinations to the arcane social, political and religious principles of the great hero. For them, Rizal’s two great masterpieces, Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo are more than novels. These writings concealed an archaic spiritual battle between good and evil spawned into the very nerve of human society, incurable like a social cancer.

So, and again, who is Dr. Jose Rizal? Is he a Maharlikan? Through his writings, Rizal often claimed of being one citizen of a “Malayan” blood. A Malay blood (race) pertains to the racial identification in general of all groups of people or nations originated or thriving in the Malay region. Citing from Wikipedia source, the Malays are an ethnic group of Austronesian peoples predominantly inhabiting the Malay Peninsula, eastern Sumatra and coastal Borneo, as well as the smaller islands which lie between these locations — areas that are collectively known as the Malay world. Is the description of the locations sound familiar? Remarkably, most Lemurian enthusiasts would agree that it is the same location where the lost world of Lemuria once located. The same locations is also designated through this blog where the first Maharlikans thrived, and that’s the rallying point taken seriously into consideration.

Notice also the similarities of Jose Rizal with Gautama Buddha and Jesus Christ, both did inspire for the foundations of Buddhism and Christianism, respectively. Buddha’s teachings of “ahimsa” traced its roots from the Maharlikan’s wisdom of “respect for all forms of life”, which is also reflected in Jesus’ “love thy fellowmen” teaching. Rizal was in straight opposition to arms struggle or bloody rebellion as proposed by the “plebeians” in their struggle for independence. His view of social reform through the might of the pen or through peaceful means reflects those of the Maharlikan thinking. Despite of his opposition, for the virtuous men, Rizal was more than a warrior, he was a true freedom fighter without necessarily committing himself into the battle field and directly confront the enemies for he believed that pen is mightier than sword. Rizal is the epitome of a truly intellectual reformer.

Fact #3: The Maharlikans Were Not Fearsome Warriors

3. The Maharlikans were not warriors contrary to prevailing notions because during their times they have no enemies or in conflict with other races, except with nature's law of balance and restoration that destroyed the grandeur of their civilization.

The Maharlikans were peace-loving people contrary to prevailing claims that they were warriors. They knew of the Gods (Elohim) in the heavens (shamayim) who created them. Though they never conceived in the rational sense any form or pattern of a system of belief called religion, their ways of living conformed harmoniously with laws of the Gods and of nature, to the principles and virtue of love, for which, its solemn practice begets mutual respect, loving-kindness, compassion, and the respect for life. Every member of the community had earned the respect as they have conferred the same respect due to others. The connection was so strong that Jainism's teaching of ahimsa or non-injury to anyone has its linking from the Maharlikan's concept of respect for all forms of life. This was slightly modified in Buddha's teaching of the "law of cause and effect" or karma thus popularized the proverb, "Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful".

Moreover, the concept of Maharlikan warrior was a colonial mentality of Srivijayan or Majapahit Empire influence who brought to them those warlike attitudes. The Indonesians were the real warriors of excelled marksmanship thirsty of the enemy's blood. The pure Maharlikans on the other side were neither oppressive nor defensive. Taking arms or engaging one's self in conflict with other people, such as in war or arms struggle, justifying killing, is for them a taboo condemned at all levels. That Maharlikan warrior thinking is contrary to the law of co-existence.