1.

Rizal civic contribution and accomplishment as an ophthalmologist, engineer,

Ophthalmology was not Rizal’s real passion, but like his political writings for
which he is most famous, and which sparked the first revolution for freedom in Asia and
led him to a destiny he did not plan for himself, his becoming an ophthalmologist was
also driven primarily by love. He wrote what he wrote because of a deep love for
country. He became an ophthalmologist because of a deep love for his mother. His
suffering Motherland was under an abusive and oppressive foreign power and through
his written work he hoped to open the eyes of both his countrymen and the Spanish
authorities. He longed to give his mother sight just as he longed to bring vision to his
“blind” countrymen. He wanted to heal them both.

His four-year inter regnum in Dapitan was tediously unexciting, but was
abundantly fruitful with varied achievements. A lesser man might have wallowed in
depression and loneliness, but Rizal took it as a challenge and applied everything he
knew to making his place of exile a better place: he practiced medicine, pursued
scientific studies, continued his artistic and literary works, widened his knowledge of
languages, established a school for boys, promoted community development projects,
invented a wooden machine for making bricks, and engaged in farming and commerce.

Rizal yearned for the Filipinos to develop true independence and march with
dignity alongside men from other free countries of the world. His solution was a social
revolution through civic contributions and accomplishments, and mostly towards the
education of the youth.

2. Why was Rizal exiled in Dapitan and not to the other place?

The decision to exile José Rizal to Dapitan was taken so he could contemplate
his sins against Spain and, “publicly retract his errors concerning religion, and make
statements that were clearly pro-Spanish and against revolution”. He was exiled in
Dapitan because like nearby Dipolog, it was a Jesuit mission. It was hoped that the
Jesuits could convince this Ateneo alumnus to turn away from his subversive and
separatist ideas as well as his “shipwreck of Faith.”

3. Saddest life he had in Dapitan.

Rizal was in Dapitan when he learned that his true love Leonor Rivera had died.
After two years of her married life, Leonor died on August 28, 1893 from complications
of childbirth, while Jose was serving his term as an exile in Dapitan. Rizal’s mourning
heart was injured even more upon learning that “Leonor had asked to be buried in the
saya (native skirt) she was wearing when he and she had first come to an
‘understanding.’ She had also asked for the silver cup which held the ashes of the few
letters from him which had reached her”. What somewhat consoled his desolate heart
was the visits of his mother and some sisters.

While walking toward the place of his execution on December 30, 1896, Rizal
turned towards the sea and was said to have uttered, “What a beautiful morning! On
mornings like this, I used to take walks here with my sweetheart”. By the term
“sweetheart”, Rizal was most likely referring to Leonor Rivera. On the record therefore,
she was the girlfriend last mentioned by the hero before he died. In fact, Rizal was said
to have “kept a lock of Leonor’s hair and some of her letters until his death”.

4. Why there was a revamp in the Jesuit administration in Dapitan?

There was a revamp in the Jesuit administration in Dapitan because Rizal did not
subscribe to the religious interpretations of Catholic Dogmas made by Father Pastells
who was the Superior of teh Jesuit Society in teh Philippines. Father Pastells then
instructed two Jesuits in Mindanao - Father Obach, Cura of Dipolog - to try their best to
bring back Rizal within the Catholic fold. Additionally, he assigned Father Fransisco de
Paula Sanchez, rizal's favorite teacher at the Ateneo de Manila, to Dapitan.

5. Did Rizal successfully cure the eyes of the Englishman that went to him in Dapitan?

Yes, there was a time when a wealthy englishman went to his clinic and Rizal
successfully removed the patient’s cataract where he was paid Php 500. The money he
received was used to put up lamps in their streets.

6. Who was the emissary of Andres Bonifacio that met Rizal in Dapitan?

In June, 1896, the leaders of the Katipunan decided to inform Rizal of the
society's plan to start a revolution. Dr. Pio Valenzuela was chosen as the emissary to
Dapitan. Bonifacio sent Dr. Pio Valenzuela, to Dapitan to seek Dr. Rizal’s advice, and
his blessing for the armed revolution that was being planned.

7. Rizal's advise to Bonifacio for the revolution plan of the Katipunan?

In June, 1896, the leaders of the Katipunan decided to inform Rizal of the
society's plan to start a revolution. Dr. Pio Valenzuela was chosen as the emissary to
Dapitan. On June 21, 1896, Dr. Valenzuela met Rizal in Dapitan and informed the latter
of the society's plan. He also told Rizal of the Katipunan's plan to rescue him from his
exile. Rizal did not agree with both plans. He believed that it was premature to start a
revolution because the people were not prepared for a revolution and the Katipunan did
not have the money and war machinery to sustain the armed struggle and win the war.
He refused the offer of the Katipunan to rescue him because he had given his word of
honor to the Spanish authorities. Valenzuela returned to Manila and informed Bonifacio
of the outcomes of the secret meeting.

8. Was Rizal's marriage to Josephine Bracken legally binding and divinely acceptable?  

It was Rizal’s desire to get married with Josephine according to the Roman
Catholic rite. However, the authorities of the Catholic made a condition. Rizal should
retract some earlier, as heretic classified statements. They sent the Jesuit Frater
Balaguer to him in the cell. He should try to bring him in the conversation again on the
line of the Catholic Church. Now for Rizal, hours of moral conflicts and conscience
examination were starting. But in the end, he agrees. The document whose original was
rediscovered in 1935 in the archives of the archdiocese Manila has the following text:
"I declare myself a Catholic and in this religion in. I retract with all my heart
whatever in my words, writings, publications and conduct has been contrary to my
quality as a son of the Catholic Church. I believe and profess whatever she teaches and
I submit myself to whatever she commands. I abominate Masonry, as the enemy that it
is of the Church, and as a Society prohibited by the Church. The Diocesan Prelate can,
as the Superior Ecclesiastical authority, make public this spontaneous manifestation of
mine in order to repair the scandals that my acts have caused and so that God and the
people may pardon me."
The retraction is for the Princes of the Church a great success. However, there
are also church-critical historians, who deny the existence of a cancellation because it
would not have fitted to Rizal’s character. They point out that the retraction was
formulated in a very difficult and exceptional situation and that even Rizal’s last poem
„ My last Farewell” implicate a church-critical statement:

…. I'll go where there are no slaves, tyrants or hangmen

So yes, Rizal's marriage to Josephine Bracken was valid and divinely acceptable.
They both got married after the Catholic rite on December 30, 1986, at five o'clock in the
early morning, two hours before Rizal gets executed. However, a certificate of marriage
was not handed over to Jospehine.

9. Was Rizal really against to the bloody struggle on revolution like what Andres
Bonifacio strived, wherein fact Rizal was good in using fencing and pistol/rifle? Second,
why Rizal showed preference to write for achieving the nation's freedom? Differentiate
or presume the views of Rizal on both sides, the pros and cons on that two questions.

 The hesitation of Rizal against the revolution was supported by Dr. Pio
Valenzuela’s 1896 account of the revolution after he was sent by Andres Bonifacio to
Dapitan to seek Rizal’s opinion and approval in launching an armed rebellion against
the Spanish administration.  In September 1896, Valenzuela before a military court
testified that Rizal was resolutely opposed to the idea of a premature armed rebellion.

 However, Valenzuela after two decades reversed his story by saying that Rizal
was not actually against the revolution but advised the Katipuneros to wait for the right
timing, secure the needed weapons and get the support of the rich and scholarly class. 
Valenzuela recounted that his 1896 statements were embellished due to duress and
torture and it was made to appear that in his desire “not to implicate” or “save” Rizal,
testified that the latter was opposed to the rebellion. This turn of events put historians
into a great confusion, making Rizal’s stand over the Philippine Revolution,
controversial and debatable, making him both hero and anti-hero.

   Constantino, in reality did not disrobe Rizal the merit he deserves, what he did
was a critical evaluation of Rizal as a product of his time.  He pointed out that even
without Rizal, the nationalistic movement would still advance with another figure to take
his place because it was not Rizal who shaped the turn of events but otherwise. 
Historical forces untied by social developments impelled and motivated Rizal to rose up
and articulate the people’s sentiments through his writings.  In fact, the revolution
ensued even Rizal disagreed with it.  Finally, Constantino argued that to better
understand the hero, we should also take note of his weaknesses and learn from them.