Monthly Archives: December 2010


Another stage of challenges in life will be coming. At exactly 12:00MN, the year 2011 will be starting. The year will be opened by these numbers 010111. It was just few days ago since the first month of Hijra, the Muharram, the first month of Gregorian calendar, January is here. The calendar was first called Julian calendar, named after Roman leader Julius Caesar and changed to Gregorian calendar after Pope Gregory.
The Islamic Calendar was instituted during the time of second Caliph of Islam, Hazrat Umar Ibn Khattab, when he said, “the Hijra has separated the truth from falsehood, therefore, let it become the epoch of the era”. But the calendar was named after the emigration of Nabi Muhammad (s.a.w) in the year 622 A.D from Makkah to Madina. This emigration marks the beginning of Hijrah.
Every start of the year would be the beginning of every wish and renewal of hope by people of the world. People may wish to keep the bad fate away and let the good fate coming.
I wish and hope to myself for a good health and long lives. I wish and hope to the Tausug’s cause for complete independence of their homeland, Sulu Sultaniyah Darul Islam would be realized soon.
I wish and hope that international community will have the open eyes, mind and heart to keep track of the Sulu Sultaniyah’s cause for complete freedom as Kosovo and Palestine.
I wish and hope that Sulu Sultaniyah will follow the way of Kosovo and Palestine as new Free State and become the member of the family of free people; free from Riba, free from ignorance, free from the clutches of colonial mentality, free from arrogance and free from downgrading others.   
I wish and hope that everything that I wanted to have in my remaining lives extended by Allah will be realized. I wish and hope that the novel I was starting to write will be finish soon.
I wish and hope I could write more books about Sulu archipelago and Tausug. I wish and hope I could finish the script for our first film project soon.
I wish and hope that we could pursue our dream to retrace the trace of the coming of Islam to Sulu Archipelago and write its story. I wish and hope that Allah guides me always to the right way and would increases my obedience to HIM.
I wish and hope a happy Amun Jadid and happy New Year to All!    
Category: Uncategorized

Using Hermeneutic Principles to help solve the Bangsa Moro Problem – Part 2



The Historical Conservation Society is an elite group of Filipinos and foreigners interested in Philippine history. They come from the same social stratum and generally have the same biases and prejudices. They form a close-knit interpretive community. Mr. Felix had absolutely no qualms about sharing his true feelings about the Moros and Islam.

But in the society at large, most people do not want to show their biases, not in this politically correct world. However, a survey asking innocuous questions might draw some inferences on the ignorance or non-awareness of people about something. And ignorance is usually the cause of prejudices.

A questionnaire was given to some 17 young students of the University of the Philippines (16 – 21 years old). 11 of them come from the Tagalog tribe, 2 are Visayans and the rest come from non-Tagalog areas of Luzon. The aim of the questionnaire was to gauge their awareness/non-awareness of things Moro/Muslim.


The Questionnaire was a multiple choice type so it would be easier to spot the more politically correct answer. Only 4 out of 17 answered that a Moro is a Muslim because the other choice – a Moro is a Muslim indigenous to Mindanao – looks and sounds the better answer.  If no answers were provided, most would probably say that a Moro is a Muslim. Nevertheless, in spite of the presence of the correct answer, 23% still chose the Moro is a Muslim answer. Like Mr. Felix, they believe that Moros and Muslims are actually synonymous and interchangeable.

(There is confusion among the general Philippine populace on the difference between a Muslim and a Moro. A Muslim is a follower of the Islamic religion while a Moro is indigenous to Mindanao. The Moro definition is not historically correct. The Spaniards used to call all Muslims Moros, from the Spanish Moors to the Muslim Malays and Indonesians.)

Yet even those who answered ‘the Moro is a Muslim indigenous to Mindanao’ thought that Yakans and Samals are Lumads. Actually, most of them have no idea what or who the Yakans and Samals are. Some Yakans and most Badjaos are non-Muslims but all are Moros.

A majority (59%) believes that the Moros do not like to be called Moros. It does not seem apparent to them that  the M in MNLF and MILF stand for Moro and not Muslim.

Practically every schoolchild is taught that Rajah Soliman was the last King of Manila. Why then do many Filipinos think that Soliman was either Christian or pagan? His very name is Islamic – Suleiman not Solomon — and the reason he fought the Spanish was for Freedom and Islam. In this survey, 40% think that Soliman was non-Muslim. Does this mean that teachers and/or textbooks do not say that Soliman or Lakan-Dula were Muslims?

Around 65% think that the Abu Sayyaf Group is not just a kidnap-for ransom gang or a bunch of criminals but is a {‘legitimate”) separatist Moro rebel group.

Most of the respondents have no Moro friends while some had Moro friends before. From their comments and answers, one can conclude that they really do not know much about the Moros, which is really the crux of the problem.

The collective memory against the Moros (whether ‘foreign Moros’ or local Moros) as immortalized in zarzuelas and moro-moro; the depiction of Moros as uncivilized in history books by Spanish, American and Filipino writers; the constant wars against the Moros waged by various Philippine administrations – all these create huge amounts of biases and prejudices.

And this can only be remedied if there is an awareness of the Moro culture and history in the Philippine experience. To paraphrase Ben Jonson, “Peace hath an enemy, its name is Ignorance.”

Surveys, Part II

Sultan Qudarat’s speech

In order to further test hermeneutic principles, we asked a sample of students to read the speech delivered by the Maguindanaon Sultan Qudarat to the M’ranaos in 1639. In contrast to the Spanish texts, this speech is very positive for the Moros. It shows that the Sultan is quite clear on the issues at hand; i.e., liberty or subjugation by the Castillans.

If it is true that the text itself has a life of its own, and directly communicates with the reader, as alleged by hermeneutics, then this speech will have positive effects on its readers. The subject readers are all University of the Philippines (UP) students, quite young (18 / 19 years old)


The results of this small survey showed that a positive document could have positive effects on the readers. The readers hardly knew Qudarat, but after reading his speech, they seemed to have a more positive view of the Moros (brave warriors, proud heritage, etc.) The speech also clarified to them that the Moros’ enemies were the Spaniards and not the Indios or Tagalogs or Visayans.

Most of the respondents were 18-year olds which mean that they were not yet born during the MNLF wars of the 70s or even the signing of the Tripoli Agreement. They were even too young when Ramos signed the Jakarta Peace Agreement with Nur Misuari. Their concept of the Moro Problem seems to be centered on the Abu Sayyaf Group. Although the “all-out war” policy of the Estrada government was directed more against the MILF, these young students do not seem to know the difference between the Abu Sayyaf and the MILF since the media do not really bother to indicate such difference.

From the results of this survey, one can conclude that the students of today come from a different interpretive community as the generation of Mr. Felix, Jr.  The college students of today are ignorant of Moro history and even the existence of a Moro Problem. They were not born yet during the MNLF wars of the 1970s. But this ignorance can be a positive thing. Unlike the generation of Mr. Felix, these young people do not have deep suspicion or even hatred against the Moros.

The Siege of Palumpong

To test the above statements, we asked another group of UP  students to read the text of the Siege of Palumpong and answer a questionnaire. The rationale behind this survey is to test whether the old generation of Mr. Felix shares the same sentiments as the young generation of today’s college students.


Unlike Mr. Felix, the respondents thought that the text was biased and exaggerated. Almost half thought that it was not even factual. One respondent even gave an additional comment that it was “too miraculous.”
However, even if they felt that the text was biased and exaggerated, it appeared that they were affected by it. In the question on what they think of the Moros, the Sultan Qudarat speech respondents answered positively. This time, the respondents answered negatively. A very small portion (14%) gave positive remarks. Some admitted that the text influenced them.

Majority thought negatively of the authors because they did not believe the truthfulness of the article. They seemed to take it against the authors for writing an obviously exaggerated account (to their minds) that they considered almost like an insult to their intelligence. The respondents were all UP students. Would it have made a difference if the respondents were students of say, Ateneo, which is run by the Jesuits or even Miriam College, a neighboring Catholic school?

All of them answered that the Spanish were the enemies of the Moros in 1754. One respondent reiterated her answer in the Comment section but added that she will have to check it up. It is important that the Filipinos realize that the Moros’ enemies then were the Spaniards and not the Christianized natives, who were themselves subjugated by the Spaniards.

A majority thinks that there is no such thing as a Moro Problem while the others think that the Moro Problem is just the Abu Sayyaf problem. Some believe that the problem lies in some discriminatory practices of the Christians towards the Moros. Again, the ignorance of the students about the Moro Issue is quite surprising. But again, such ignorance can be a positive factor.

Most proposed Peace Talks and Better Understanding in order to solve the problem. Proposals to give the Moros independence would have been significant if the respondents knew what the Problem was all about. However, those who proposed to give the Moros what they want also answered that they didn’t know much about the Moro Issue.

As in the Qudarat speech survey, most respondents did not agree with the all-out war approach. Those who agreed seemed to have the idea that the all-out war was only waged against the Abu Sayyaf.

The Palumpong survey indicated that a) the younger generation do not share the same perception as the generation of Mr. Felix, and b) a 200-plus year old text can still affect readers as indicated by the increased number of negative descriptions of what a Moro is as well as the negative descriptions of the authors, namely, the Jesuits and c) a negative document can still have negative effects (image of the Moros) even if the readers do not fully believe the document’s truthfulness. The Palumpong survey also confirms the Qudarat speech findings that a) the students are hardly aware of the Moro Problem, b) the students equate the Moro Problem with the Abu Sayyaf kidnappings and c) the younger generation prefers Peace Talks to “all-out war.”


Hermeneutics remind us that the prejudices and biases of the perceiver must always be taken into account.  From Fisher’s reader-response theory, we see that texts get their meaning from the reader. Mr. Felix’s “interpretation” of the 1755 texts is a case in point. It can be concluded that Mr. Felix and his colleagues at the Historical Conservation Society belong to the same interpretive community. The fact that the members of that Society comprise the elites of the larger Philippine society is ominous for the Moros, who are in the minority and who appear to be the object of hatred of Mr. Felix’s group.

The Christian majority, specially the Christian settlers in Mindanao, decries the fact that the Moros tend to always refer to the historical past. The Christians maintain that any dialogue between the Moros and Indios must necessarily be grounded in present-day realities. But Mr. Felix’s reaction to the 1755 texts clearly shows that Christians, as exemplified by Mr. Felix, are very much affected by the past. As the great American President John Quincy Adams once declared, “Who we are is who we were.”

The two surveys also show that centuries-old texts can and do influence today’s readers. Considering that most history (text)books in the Philippines have very disparaging accounts of the Moro, and present mass media coverage are very biased against the Moros, tearing away prejudices and biases would be an Herculean task.

The surveys of a small sampling of students do not give encouragement either. Most of them admit ignorance of Moros / Muslims and their ways. They get their impressions of Moros mostly from the mass media. But as Littlejohn says “if literary texts always get their meaning from the reader, media depictions must also derive meaning from the interpretive community.”(Littlejohn, p.210)

Since the mass media derive meaning from the interpretive community, then the plight of the Moros would certainly go for the worse. The mass media organizations are owned by non-Moros. Unlike the Chinese and the Iglesia ni Cristo, the Moros do not own any mass media organization. They have absolutely no influence in the mass media as no mass media outfit targets them as the audience.

In hermeneutics, the negatives can be used positively. The ignorance of the younger generation about the Moros can be regarded positively. Since this generation is not full of mental baggage about the Moros, i.e., there is much less prejudice and bias against the Moros, they can be made to have a better understanding of Moro history, culture and traditions so that in the future, when the leaders will come from this generation, they can help promote a lasting peace with the Moros.

The survey respondents (3 samplings) are young university undergraduate students. The fact that they don’t know much about the Moro Problem may indicate that the general population may also not know much about the Moro Problem. If UP students are ignorant of the real causes of the Moro Problem, could we expect the average Filipino to be better informed? Perhaps it is actually ignorance of the real causes of the problem that is the stumbling block to its eventual solution. (It is the habit of the government never to admit publicly its ignorance on any subject.)

Combating ignorance is a long process. It would need an overhaul of educational materials about the Moros as well as better portrayal of Moros in the mass media. And most importantly, there must be a strong resolve by the government to truly help the Moros by empowering them; i.e., appointing qualified and competent Moros (not only those subservient to them) to high government posts, giving educational and economic opportunities to Moros (including those who are not Malacanang lackeys), refraining from interference in local politics (rigging the elections), and giving sufficient budget (actually not technically) to local government units in the Moro region.

In the 1970s, at the height of the fighting, the government spent millions of dollars (one million dollars a day according to some reports) and lost at least 50,000 lives including thousands of young Filipino soldiers. Both sides claim victory in the MNLF war, which ended because of Marcos’s urgent plea to Libya’s Qadaffi to call for a Ceasefire Agreement which eventually led to the Tripoli Agreement.

The MILF fight has been costing the country quite a sum, too, especially Mr. Estrada’s “all-out war” campaign. Mr. Estrada declared a smashing victory over the MILF, which made his popularity rise sky-high. Yet it appears that MILF is still as strong as ever. Mr. Estrada also declared complete victory over the Abu Sayyaf Group.  But as everybody knows, it’s still business-as-usual for the Group.

The Abu Sayyaf, which the government equates with the Moro Problem, is creating black propaganda not only for the Moro Cause but also for the Philippine government. Tourism and Business in Mindanao have suffered greatly. The only thriving industry there is the kidnapping industry run by the Abu Sayyaf Group whose members, according to the grapevine, are mere “industrial partners” whose real financiers (non-Moros) are in the higher echelons of government.

From the 15th century, the Moros were masters of their destinies while the Indios were a subjugated people under the Spanish. It was only in the 20th century when the Moros finally accepted foreign (American) domination in exchange for the right to practice their religion and way of life. Later, they agreed to be part of a Republic to be shared with the Indios, now called Filipinos. Some thirty years after their experiment with co-habitation with Filipinos in a republican setting, the Moros rose again, only to be foiled by Marcos’s diplomatic and political genius.

The new century / millennium started with an American War Against Terrorism, which many Muslims the world over see as the War against Islam. (The lapsus lingue of US President Bush when he declared a “Crusade” against his enemies did not escape the Muslims’ attention.) The presence of US Marines in Mindanao purportedly to help the Philippine Army fight “terrorists” makes the prospect of a renewed Moro War quite bright.

Recently, the GRP signed a peace agreement with the MILF in Kuala Lumpur. At the same time, the Philippine government signed another agreement with members of the Malaysian and Indonesian governments labeling the MILF as a “terrorist” organization. No less than the Philippine Vice President and concurrent

Foreign Affairs Secretary, Teofisto Guingona, expressed surprise at such equivocation.
It appears that the present Philippine administration is still deciding whether to pursue peace or wage war against the MILF. There is also equivocation with regards to MNLF chief Nur Miuari. Will he be tried in Philippine courts like a common criminal or be sent to exile?

America has a war economy. Its economy will only expand during wartime, as it did during the two world wars. The Philippines will be devastated if another war in the magnitude of the 1970s MNLF war will erupt.
But there is no need for war. Peace is always the better alternative. Understanding the issues by re-reading and re-interpreting Moro and Filipino history and understanding the protagonists’ culture, traditions, biases and prejudices may be the key to eventual peace in the country.

Filipinos, in whatever capacity, should not leave the solution to the government alone.  Everyone should give its contribution to the solution. Spending billions of pesos on the military will simply create more poverty, more gaping mouths with no food to eat, more women and men having to prostitute themselves here and abroad just to earn a living, more workers forced to separate with kith and kin to work abroad and suffer so much indignities.

Peace in Mindanao does not necessarily mean capitulation of one side to the other. Peace in Mindanao means peace for the whole country. It means less military spending, more money for more useful purposes, more foreign and local investments which would mean more jobs and more money to spend.

From these little surveys and Mr. Felix’s interpretation of a text written some 250 years ago, we saw that texts can have positive and negative effects. The surveys also showed the ignorance of the Indios about the Moro Issue. An avenue for Peace that is opened for us is the Information path. Moro history (Majul’s Muslims in the Philippines book can be the start) should be taught in schools and universities with special emphasis on incidents portraying Moro-Indio cooperation such as the time when Moro datus sealed a pact with Bohol Indio leaders against the Spanish conquistadors. Islamic history should also be studied, as part of World History, without its distortions. It must be emphasized too that during the Crusades when Europeans invaded Palestine and the Middle East in the name of Christianity, the Christian Arabs fought side by side with their Muslim brethren against the foreign invaders.  In the same vein, Lapu-Lapu (allegedly a pagan), Rajah Humabon (allegedly a Christianized indio) and Rajah Suleiman (a Moro) all fought the Spanish/European invaders.

The government should promote the culture and interests of the Moros through films and TV programs as well as in other media like the periodicals and the Web. Only through a better understanding of the Moros would the Indios be inclined to make real and sincere peace with them.

The surveys have proved that texts do have an impact on its readers. If the government and the mass media will continue producing texts of all kinds that depict the Moros in a bad light, then no peace can come to Mindanao.  (end)


Andrew , Dudley (1984)  Concepts in Film Theory, Oxford University Press: London
Carr, Edward Hallett  (1961) What is History? Vintage Books: New York
Dery, Luis Camara (1997), The Kris in Philippine History: A Study of the Impact of Moro
Anti-Colonial Resistance, 1571-1896
Jubair, Salah,  (1997) A Nation Under Endless Tyranny, 2nd ed., Lahore
Krippendorf, Klaus (1995) Undoing Power,  Critical Studies in Mass Communication               June 1995
_______________(1989) The Power Of Communication And The Communication Of
Power: Toward An Ethical Theory Of Communication The Annenberg School of Communication University of Pennsylvania
Littlejohn, Stephen (1979) Theories of Human Communication Wadsworth Publishing: Belmont CA
Majul, C. Adib (1973),  Muslims in the Philippines, UP Press: Quezon City
Ricoeur, Paul,  Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences: Essays on Language, Action and Interpretation, trans. and ed. J. B. Thomson, Cambridge Univ. Press : 1981, pp. 64-80

Using Hermeneutic Principles to help solve the Bangsa Moro Problem – Part 1

(2001) Datu Jamal Ashley Yahya Abbas

In the Philippine context, studying the Muslim-Christian (or Moro-Indio) communication relationship within the framework of hermeneutic phenomenology may give significant clues to the solution of the so-called Moro Problem.


For example, one of the most glaring differences between the Moros and the Filipino majority (Indios)  is their view of history. For the Filipino majority, Philippine history began in 1521 with the “discovery of the Philippines” by Ferdinand Magellan and the start of Christianity in the country with the conversion of Rajah Humabon and his family. The Filipinos of today believe that history books recount Filipino history from that time on.

In the book “Under the Crescent Moon: Rebellion in Mindanao” (Q.C.:2000, 327 pp.), two journalists who some now consider as “experts” in the Moro issue by virtue of this book, pronounced that “Mindanao was part of the Philippines ever since the Spanish colonizers came and created boundaries in what were formerly trading networks.” Many Filipinos of today even believe that the nation-state called Philippines actually existed from that time (1521) onwards. The myth of an enduring nation-state called the Philippines with Christian, Muslim and pagan inhabitants ruled by Spain for 350 years and America for 50 years is being constantly rekindled by all forms of media.

It would indeed be a shock for many Filipinos to learn that for 350 years, the word Filipino actually was reserved for Spaniards in the Philippines. And that their grandparents and great-grandparents were not Filipinos but “naturales”, “indios” or “mestizos”. A close reading of so-called Philippine history would reveal that it is a chronology of events affecting primarily Spaniards in the Philippines (i.e., Filipinos). The present-day Filipinos were mentioned, if ever, only tangentially. The Moros actually occupy more space, as they were the feared and hated enemies of the Spaniards in the Philippines (i.e., Filipinos).

On the other hand, a look at Moro history through various historical documents would reveal that the Moros were sovereign nations and they only interacted with European powers and other neighboring Muslim states. The Moros never considered the Indios (the present-day Filipinos) as sovereign people. The Moros never interacted with them officially and diplomatically. The Moros considered the Indios as natives who have accepted Christianity and became practically slaves of the Spanish. They were therefore considered fair game for the slave trade. In fact up to this day, among some Moros, the word Filipino is synonymous to Christian or slave.

As if in revenge, the Philippine post-colonial government had constructed a mythical history. Philippine history books made “historically important” the various isolated even personal Indio “uprising’s” against the Spanish. According to this version of history, the Moros were the unruly Muslim inhabitants in Mindanao who were dealt with “punitive expeditions” from Manila every now and then. And the Philippines is glorified as the “only Christian nation in Asia.”

Philippine history books do not mention, for example, what happened to the companions of Magellan after he was killed by Lapu-Lapu. Philippine history books do not mention that Rajah Humabon, whom the present-day Filipinos celebrate as the first “Filipino” Christian king, invited the Spanish/European survivors of Magellan’s forces and massacred all but one of them. Humabon was a Christian for only a day or two.

Strictly speaking, Philippine history started in earnest only in 1896 with the Katipunan Revolt or at the earliest, in the martyrdom of the three Spanish priests, Fathers Gomez, Burgos and Zamora, who fought for the rights of Filipino clerics. Before this, Philippine history is really history of Spaniards in the Philippines* except for the sporadic and isolated “revolts” of the Indios all throughout the Colonial Period.

On the other hand, Moro history is partially or completely ignored by Philippine historians. Even in schools and universities, Moro history is not studied nor given any importance. But the Moros have a long memory. History is embedded in their culture. Royal families take great care in documenting their “salsilah” or family genealogies, which are by themselves, historical documents.

The Christian settlers in Mindanao criticize the Moros for their constant harping on the historical past. These settlers are proud that they do not care about the past but instead look to the future. (Jubair: 1997)
But according to philosophical hermeneutics, “history is not separated from the present. We are always simultaneously part of the past, in the present, and anticipating the future. In other words, the past operates on us now in the present, and affects our conception of what is yet to come. At the same time, our present notions of reality affect how we view the past.”(Littlejohn, p.204)

Moro leaders and intellectuals maintain that if the Philippine government truly wants to solve the so-called Moro Problem, it must exert an honest-to-goodness effort to understand the feelings, sentiments, biases, ideals, prejudices, customs, traditions and historical experience of the Bangsa Moro as enunciated or articulated by the Moros themselves.

Muslim Filipino historian Cesar Adib Majul, former dean of the UP College of Arts and Sciences, lamented that “History books in the Philippines tend to lay emphasis on events in other islands and glorify national heroes from such places, as if the history of the Philippines is only that of people who had been conquered while the history of the unconquered ones do not merit a share in the history of the Philippines.” (Majul: 1973)
It is indeed unfortunate that there are no Moro historians although some Moros are now starting to research and write about Moro history. Dean Majul is a Muslim of Arab and (Christian) Filipino parentage. Although he is a Muslim Filipino, he is not a Moro. He later migrated to the US.

Historians know that there is a “need of imaginative understanding for the minds of the people with whom he (the historian) is dealing, for the thought behind their acts.” (Carr:1961, p.26) This principle is important to remember because as the historian is faced with a sea full of “facts”, “by and large, the historian will get the kind of facts he wants.” (Carr, p.26) Moro history as written by the Moros’ traditional enemies – the Spanish, the Americans and the Indios-Filipinos – cannot possibly have even the “most elementary measure of imaginative understanding.” In his Cambridge lectures, Edward Hallett Carr concluded that “History cannot be written unless the historian can achieve some kind of contact with the mind of those about whom he is writing.” (Carr, p.27)

The long history of the Moro-Spanish wars had lasting effects on the collective memory of the Indios. For almost 350 years, the Indios were helpless natives “caught between the Spaniards, who were the masters of the land and the Moros, who were the masters of the seas. ” (Dery 1997) When the Americans came, the idea that “a good Moro is a dead Moro” was given renewed currency. The Moros were usually referred to as “uncivilized”, “savages” or “barbarians” by the Americans.

To pretend that the modern-day Filipinos (now supposedly composed of Indios, Moros and pagans) is a homogeneous nation with one history and one destiny and that the present conflict in the South is simply due to some disgruntled Moro bandits will not solve the problem and may even exacerbate it.

Communication Theoretical Apprcahes

As Gadamer pointed out, the prejudices of each party must be acknowledged and transformed into a positive force. Both parties to the conflict must acknowledge the fact that they do not like each other and that such dislike had already cost both sides tens of thousands of lives and millions of dollars since the 1970’s.
Hermeneutics must necessarily come into play if one were serious in solving the “communication gap” between the Muslim and Christian Filipino communities. There must be a real effort in cultural interpretation.
The Moro problem is even exacerbated by the textual interpretation of both groups to important documents like the Philippine Constitution and the Tripoli Agreement.

Many people in the government and the academe try to view the Moro Problem within the framework of social constructionist communication theories. The government constructs an image of a homogenized “Filipino” culture or nation through its schools, government agencies and the mass media. This “Filipino” nation has a “national hero”, a national flower”, a “national fruit”, etc. of which every Filipino citizen is supposed to be proud of. (Interestingly, all these “national” things seem to come from the Tagalog region.)

Some academics use Marxist critical theories in analyzing the Moro Issue. The Moro issue is argued as one of the results of Spanish colonialism and American imperialism. But some Moro intellectuals believe that Marxist postcolonial discourses can be misleading because the Moros are still under colonial rule; i.e., Filipino (Indio) colonial rule. It is absolutely useless to blame the Americans or multinationals or globalization for the plight of the Moros, as what the leftists are wont to do. If there’s anyone to blame, it is the current colonial power, i.e., the Filipino government. The MNLF, MILF, BMLO and other Moro groups have petitioned the United Nations and the OIC to resolve that the Bangsa Moro nation be de-colonized.

Today’s Filipino historians, writers, or intellectuals do not mention the fact that the great Filipino nationalist himself, Claro M. Recto, authored the bill called “Colonization of Mindanao Act.”

Critical studies tend to exacerbate social conditions. And since critical studies are focused on power, violence usually results in societies they (the theorists and their studies) are observing (Krippendorf 1989).
Hermeneutic phenomenology or philosophical hermeneutics could be the framework needed to help solve this socio-political problem. Using critical theories, which focus on ideology and power, might simply aggravate the problem. As Paul Ricoeur (1981) noted:

“what is at stake can be expressed in terms of an alternative: either a hermeneutical or a critical consciousness…In contrast with the positive assessment of hermeneutics, the theory of ideology adopts a suspicious approach, seeing tradition as merely the systematically distorted expression of communication under unacknowledged conditions of violence.”

Text Interpretation

Hermeneutics say that “an explication of a text occurs only after a prior understanding of it, yet that prior understanding is justified by the careful explication it allows. In other words, before we can go about discussing and analyzing a text, we must have a global conception of its meaning.” (Dudley: 1984, p.97)

The problem lies in the interpreter’s prior conceptions. A reader necessarily has his biases and prejudices about the subject he reads. His perception of the text will have to coincide with his previously held beliefs.
As Andrew pointed out, “new hermeneutics…rest on a modernist concern about the relativity of judgment that affects all disciplines…. There is no longer a single notion of seeing, rather there are modes of seeing…” (Dudley, p.173)

The Muslim-Christian or more precisely, the Moro-Indio conflict is never ending because the biases and prejudices of both sides are not clearly expressed in a “no holds barred” dialogue. The dialogues between the Philippine government (called GRP for Government of the Republic of the Philippines) and the Moro armed groups (either the MNLF or MILF) are characterized by diplomacy, tact, duplicity, and deviousness.
Ambassador Pacifico Castro, member of the Philippine Panel in the Tripoli talks in 1976, declared that because of his expertise in the French language, he was able to make the official French version of the Tripoli Agreement very advantageous to the GRP.

In the example below, two articles written in 1755 had a tremendous impact on a particular reader 236 years later. The English translations of the two texts are titled “The Siege of Palumpong” and “The Battle of Iligan.” The Society of Jesus printed the original Spanish texts in 1755 in Manila. The English translation by Alfonso Felix, Jr. was printed in Quezon City in 1991.

As its subtitle indicates, the Palumpong article was a “report of the valiant defense put up by the Visayan natives of the town of Palumpong in the Island of Leyte of the Province of Catbalogan in the Philippines against the Muslim attack carried by the Ilanons (sic) and the Maranaos in the month of June 1754.” On the other hand, the Iligan article was a “summary of the victories that to the great glory of God and to the Luster and Honor of the Royal Catholic Arms of His Majesty in defense of the Christian communities and Islands of the Visayas were achieved against the Muslim enemies by the armada detached to the fortress of Iligan which is on the shores of the Island of Mindanao in the year 1754.”

It must be noted that the priests, in this case, the Jesuits, printed the texts. During the Moro-Spanish wars, the priests led the fight against the Moros. The priest was responsible for building the town’s fort, providing ammunition and cannons and commanding the “army”. He appointed all officers and men of the militia, guards and sentinels. Consequently, the friars were the Moros’ prime targets. They were decapitated, captured and generally ill-treated. The friar’s ransom went no less than 1,000 pesos and even went as high as 10,000 pesos (Dery, 1997, p.64). It can then be safely assumed that the texts were not objectively written. On the contrary, the texts most probably were propaganda materials used by the friars to lift the morale of the Christian natives, whom they called “naturales”.

Perception of a turn-of-the 20th century gentleman on a 230-year old text.

In 1991, Mr. Alfonso Felix, Jr. was the President of the Historical Conservation Society. The members of the Society at that time included Alejandro Melchor, Jesus Lazatin, Antonio Araneta, Jr., Enrique Syquia, Ernesto Aboitiz, Feliciano Belmonte, Jr., Antonio Concepcion, Francisco Elizalde, O.D. Corpuz, etc. – a veritable Who’s Who among the Filipino elites. Mr. Felix obtained copies of the documents from the Biblioteca Nacional de Madrid and proudly reported it to the Society.

In his Report and Acknowledgement speech of Aug. 28, 1991 in Manila, he minced no words. His prejudices and biases against the Moros and Muslims, in general, knew no bounds.

About Islam, he said: “…there seems to be in Islam something that pushes its adherents to a delight in the pain of others. The names of Genghis Khan and Tamerlaine are too well-known to need further comment.”
His hatred for Muslims is evident. He wrote: “Let us take the case of Salman Rushdie whom the Holy Ayatollah condemned to death and who is now living in hiding. Unfortunately, the British have gone soft. If they had made it clear to the Iranians that the death of Salman Rushdie would result in the destruction of Teheran, the Iranians would think twice before inflicting their religion on civilized countries.”

He called Moros names like “devils in human form” or citizens “of the Republic of Mad Dogs” or “reptiles”.  He obviously believed that the Moro Wars are not yet over.  And his recommendation: “I do not think Christian Filipinos are afraid of Moros. A modern army equipped with the weapons of today and above all with the will to use them will soon cause the Moros to reconsider. When the Italians used poison gas in Ethiopia in 1935 many Ethiopians were exterminated and the liberals of the world found themselves in tears. I do not find poison gas used against Ethiopians deplorable.”

He even counseled the then President Aquino thus: “I invite our President, Her Excellency Da. Corazon Cojuangco vda. de Aquino to reflect on my words for I feel I am expressing with these words the opinion of the majority of  Filipino peasants and Filipino soldiers.”

Felix’s reaction in the context of hermeneutic theories

Paul Ricoeur, like Gadamer, believes that the reader and the text share an intimate relationship. In fact, “the text can speak to and change the interpreter.”(Littlejohn:1979, p.209) Ricoeur calls this process appropriation, i.e., a reader who agrees with the messages of the text, appropriates the ideas of the text as his very own.

From the above example, it is patently clear that the 1755 texts and Mr. Felix had an “intimate interaction.” Although 216 years separate the text and the reader (Mr. Felix), the reader appropriated the meaning of the texts.  Mr. Felix was so worked up by the messages of the text such that he ended up delivering a very emotional address to the Historical Conservation Society.

Mr. Felix was obviously a rich and intelligent Filipino. He spoke Spanish fluently and presumably was well-read and well-traveled. Presumably, he was well respected by the society at large. He was after all, the head of the Historical Conservation Society as well as a friend of foreign dignitaries. Yet his speech could rank as one of the most bigoted speeches of the century. Was he not afraid of ridicule from his colleagues in the Historical Society? Apparently, he knew them and he knew that all of them shared the same prejudices. Perhaps the others just did not dare express them publicly.

Stanley Fish, another theorist who uses the hermeneutic circle, maintains, “readers are members of interpretive communities, groups that interact with one another, construct common realities and meanings and employ those in their readings.”(Littlejohn, p.209) The world may be shocked at Mr. Felix’s speech, but Mr. Felix very well knew that he and his audience belonged to the same interpretive community and therefore the meanings he derived from the old Spanish text would be shared by everyone in his Society.

Stanley Fish’s reader-response theory does not ask, “What does a text mean?” but “What does a text do?” In this example, the 1755 Spanish texts prompted the President of an historical society in 1991 to deliver and publish a scathing attack on Islam, the Moros and the Muslims.

Mr. Felix also proved the hermeneutic belief that “history is not separated from the present. We are always simultaneously part of the past, in the present, and anticipating the future…” Although the texts were hundreds of years old and that the present political reality is so very different from the one depicted in the texts, Mr.Felix’s reaction was still as if the Past is the Present. Although the Moro Wars between the Moros and the Spanish were over a long time ago, he called on the Philippine President, addressing her with the Spanish honorific Doña, to wage war against the Moros.


Demonization of Muslims in the Media Leads to Discrimination of Muslim Minorities

During the Middle Ages, the burghers, many of them Jews, started to gain economic power. Pretty soon, the Jew moneymen began having a monetary network all over the European continent. Kings and dukes owed them huge amounts of money. The biggest of them, like the Rothschilds gained titles to nobility. But the European Christians were not amused.

Western literature is full of anti-Semitic propaganda. Shakespeare’s Shylock is perhaps the most famous Jewish character in Western literature. Throughout the Middle Ages and well into the Industrial Age, anti-Jewish policies were enacted all over Europe.

The result of this anti-Semitic media products resulted into one of history’s biggest massacres – the German extermination of some 6 million Jews during World War II.

In the case of the Muslims, the situation is similar. Since the Middle Ages, the Church fathers had a continuous propaganda against the Muslims – the so-called heathens and infidels. This of course resulted in the Crusades, which united most of the Kingdoms of Europe.

The Christian Crusades were a failure. But the exploits of some Christians like those of Richard the Lionheart became the stuff of Christian legends. Attacks on Islam were a normal feature in Christian literature, both academic and popular.

In the Age of European Colonization, which coincided with the fall of Muslim power, Western literature on Muslims and Islam became condescending and even romanticized as something noble, feminine and eminently conquerable.

After World War II, the world witnessed the creation of several Muslim states. Although still controlled by the Western powers, the Muslim Voice suddenly made its appearance in the world media. Egypt, Indonesia and Pakistan led the articulation of Muslim aspirations.

In the 1970s, the OPEC, especially its Muslim members, flexed its muscles and declared an oil embargo. The Arab countries, as well as the Western oil companies, suddenly found themselves extremely rich – with a lot of economic power.

The Western media promptly blamed the Arabs and Muslims as the culprits in the world oil crisis. The Western-owned oil companies were exonerated. This time, caricatures of Arabs as uncivilized desert nomads (Bedouins) turned to Arabs as uncivilized but very rich oilmen buying everything Western.

With the Cold War going on, the Muslims, who were the natural enemies of Communism, were the dearest friends of the West.

When USSR invaded Afghanistan, America and the CIA funded Muslim fundamentalists from all over the Muslim world to join the Taliban in their fight against USSR. A young Saudi citizen, scion of the rich merchant family, the Bin Ladens, was made the fund-raiser in the Arab world. His name was Osama bin Laden. A Moro named Abdurajak Janjalani was one of those recruited by the CIA to fight in Afghanistan.
But with the fall of USSR and most of the Communist world, the Muslims found themselves in their traditional role – as enemies of the West. Osama Bin Laden became Enemy Number One of the US and her allies. Janjalani became Enemy Number One of the Philippine government. The US and her allies declared war against the Talibans, whom they funded, trained and helped put in power in the first place.
With Bush’s and Blair’s War on Terrorism, the Muslims found themselves having a new Identity. They are no longer heathens or infidels or exotic Orientals. They are simply Terrorists.

Muslim Minorities are Worst Victims

Anti-Muslim propaganda is inimical to all Muslims, but especially to Muslim minorities living in non-Muslim countries. These Muslims are already marginalized and continuing anti-Muslim propaganda simply foster discrimination by the majority.

Philippine case

In the Philippines, anti-Muslim propaganda has been institutionalized by the Spaniards since the 17th century. Spanish literature, documents, Church sermons and official policies are full of anti-Muslim (against all Muslims not just Moros) material. The indios or naturales (non-Muslim natives) were fed not only anti-Muslim sermons but also anti-Muslim entertainment. Zarzuelas or moro-moro were popular musical stage plays whose protagonists were Christians and Muslims (of any country). The Muslims were always the villains in these plays.

When the Americans came, the slogan became: “A good Moro is a dead Moro”.

Even after the independence in 1946, anti-Muslim stories can be found in newspapers, films, comics and even school textbooks.

When I was in Grade VI, I was scanning my younger sister’s Grade III textbook. I was so shocked to read the Moros described as “bandits, pirates and outlaws.” I remember showing the book to my brother who was in college. He simply laughed and said, “So what’s new?”

Through the years, I’ve seen the Moros / Muslims mocked, insulted in films, on TV, in comic books, on radio and in newspaper stories, columns and even editorials.

Through the years, I have been forced to defend the Moros / Muslims in school, office, seminars and various fora. 

I have later realized that when a Moro starts defending Moro or Islamic culture and identity, he will find the Christian Filipinos — be they classmates, officemates, bosses, friends or acquaintances — regarding him/her with a wary eye. And if that Moro shows his/her superiority in any way (intelligence, skills, etc.), sooner or later, that Moro would be left alone by the Christians because he/she could not be their TOKEN friend, underling or protege.

Today, many Moros have learned that in order to succeed in the Philippines, they will have to play the role of meek, mild-mannered, yes men and women to their Christian fellow citizens. Many Christian Filipino leaders have their Moro sidekicks. Non-government organizations operating in Mindanao are so happy to be surrounded by such Moros. Now, because of the presence of so many Moro a__-lickers, the Media have started to patronize the Moros in general. 

If the Philippine media do not demonize the Moros as fanatic killers, they patronize them as poor, uneducated  souls oppressed by their own leaders and in terrible need of the helping hand of peace-loving Christian Filipinos.  


Neldy Jolo
The time of struggle has started. The Assertion of Independence declaration for the Sultanate of Sulu Darul Islam is just a start of continuing struggle to free Tausug from tyranny. This is a tyranny that borne out from self-interest and individual interest. The kind of interest that wanted to claim over being the prime movers of the struggle – afraid that cannot be known as such?

The day of the Assertion of Sulu Independence Declaration.

 In the struggle there are many enemies. These enemies are internal and external. The great enemy is the internal enemy – comrades of the same struggle but different in interest. They are belonged to the same struggle, the Sulu independence, but different interest towards the struggle. One thing for sure they wanted their interest to be served.

This is the enemy that should be dealt with patience and perseverance. Afraid that the struggle will be lost in vain if not to consider this enemy’s interest – to compromise over which is less evil to give space to the “little good” is much better? This kind of enemy usually compromise but still let their interest win.

Miswarat of the Leaders before the Assertion.

The external enemy are political elite, silent masses, Philippine government personnel, professionals and business men. These groups are afraid to sacrifice what have been gained from the neo-colonial government of what they are serving – a sort of showing loyalty or by mere of still loving their job-for-living or rice-rice (bugas-bugas) in the Philippine government? 

These are probably the most challenging to the people who struggled to the general or Sulu national interest of the masses and public. The friends of the people who struggle for general interest are those belong to the same interest – not just a struggle.

Peoples’ Assembly before assertion.

 This is true when Tuan Zakaria Abdullah reminded the masses of “there are no permanent friends, only permanent interest”. Thus mean only the “interest” itself is the permanent friends.

In the struggle there are also group of “manipulator” and “money-pull-a-tour”. The manipulator is a group that educate or teach the people of their rights to become more ignorant of their rights and become inutile of their rights as people. This manipulator group is also teaching people to become more silent of truth and much vocal of false. This group calls for “unity” but let people to get away from it. This group is also promotes “will of the people” however becomes the “group’s will to the people” for manipulation.

Tausug Armed Forces are ready to defend the Sulu territory by the guns of peace.

 The “money-pull-a-tour” is a group that don’t need money but want it and don’t talk about money but speak of it. This group don’t need money because fear of people that might think the group is not for “real struggle” but for the “need of money”. This group don’t talk about money because the group don’t want people to know the interest towards it, but the group speak of money because need to have it and would get angry if not given – this led the group to be more vocal to speak about it. This “money-pull-a-tour” group is something an enigma of “pull money for a tour”. 

So much for that, Sulu Darul Islam independence deserves to be recognized by the international community because Sulu people have recognized their state as such with distinguished “Tausug Citizenship” from “Filipino Citizenship”. The Tausug respect the principle of universal declaration of human rights and international peace and security.
If the international community adhere and respect the universal principle of freedom and upheld the principle of international law for right of self-determination is a right to independence, the instance of helping to develop Sulu Darul Islam for win-win benefits is right now here!
Whatever the interest and challenges maybe, still the goal of the Tausug is to urge, “Philippines Please Withdraw from Our Beloved Country”, Sulu Darul Islam. Gradual peaceful exit is better!

Photo Courtesy: TGM Staff

Category: Uncategorized