This is a guest post from Paul Morrow, author of Ang Baybayin. Interested in writing for Baybayin.com? More info here
Last summer I wrote a series of articles about the supposed spiritual meanings of baybayin letter shapes. Recently one of the advocates of this idea, Perla Daly, posted criticisms of the article. I tried to answer the invitation on her blog for “well thought-out responses,” but I have not been able to post my response. I do not believe I am being blocked; it is most like just a technical problem. I asked Christian if he would mind if I posted here at Baybayin.com and he kindly agreed.
First of all, none of Perla Daly’s comments challenged the evidence I presented in the articles and generally she dismisses evidence-based arguments as being narrow and incomplete. Instead of refuting what I wrote, Daly chose to cast aspersions on me personally and dismiss me as merely an ignorant Westerner who is not only mocking her theory but all Filipinos and their beliefs. I can only assume this is a tactic that she hopes will bring others to her side through a sense of obligation to their Filipino heritage or through a sense of guilt for their Western heritage. I hope that assumption is wrong.
Now some specifics:
• The title of the blog in question is: “Sikolohiyang Pilipino, the Baybayin of Bahala, and a Westerner’s Mockery of Filipino beliefs and subjectivism.”
From the very start, Perla Daly’s title sets the stage for an “us-against-them” situation, the subtext being, “Look everybody! He’s mocking us! We must defend our honour, etc.
Did I mock Filipino beliefs? No. I refuted the theory of the Bathala/baybayin connection. This is not and never was a real part of any Filipino belief system, as much as Perla Daly would like it to be. I did not mock Filipino beliefs, though Perla Daly seems to think that her beliefs are those of all Filipinos.
As for subjectivism, that is fine for psychology, philosophy or religion. We can believe there are spiritual concepts in baybayin letter shapes if we want to, but if we make the claim that other people long ago believed the same thing, then we’re getting into history and for that we need evidence.
The fact is Pedro Paterno invented the baybayin/bathala idea in 1884. If it were really part of the belief system of Filipinos before that, somebody would have mentioned it in the preceding 300 years of documented Philippine history.
Another fact is that Bathala was only a deity for the Tagalogs and the Zambals; not for all the people of what we now call the Philippines. I may not understand “the metaphysical aspects of being Filipino,” as Daly claims, but then, her Bathala/bahala/baybayin theory doesn’t really apply to all Filipinos.
These facts stand even if I am, to use Daly’s condescending generalization, a Westerner who “cannot comprehend wholly Filipinos’ philosophy.”
• Daly commented on my title choice, “Da Bathala Code” as follows: “The play between Filipinos’ accents of ‘the’ and the title of the controversial Dan Brown novel is not lost on us as part mockery, part tongue-in-cheek.”
Yes, my title is tongue-in-cheek but it is not a mockery. There are plenty of examples of Filipinos using “Da” in titles (Da Buzz, Da Cocoanut Nut, etc.). I think the only readers who would see mockery in that title would probably already have a preconceived opinion of me being an ignorant and arrogant white man. There is nothing I can do about that. I could have written a much more serious or pretentious title, but I want the general public to actually read the article.
I think the allusion to Dan Brown’s “Da Vinci Code” is appropriate for Paterno’s Bathalismo. Again, this does not mock the real beliefs of Filipinos past or present.
• One of Daly’s comments on her own blog post said that I was “belittling various Filipino historical figures and national artist Tolentino.” (More of the “us-against-them” tactic.)
How did I belittle these figures? Guillermo Tolentino was a National Artist for Sculpture. In that area, he cannot be belittled. I criticized his ideas on history and the baybayin, and I was not the first. Ambeth Ocampo, the Director of the National Historical Institute, no less, has had a few chuckles at Tolentino’s expense. Google his article about “Tolentino and the Calatagan Pot.” When it comes to Philippine history, I will believe a real Filipino historian over a sculptor who talked to ghosts, any day.
Daly claimed that I was “making a determination or a judgement on Filipino ways of being that [I] totally [have] no understanding of” because I did not take Tolentino’s paranormal interests seriously. Here again, Daly is painting all Filipinos with the same brush. For me to make a judgment on all Filipinos like that, I would have to make the same gross assumption that Daly has made – that all Filipinos believe in the paranormal.
As for Pedro Paterno, he is one of the most ridiculed figures in Philippine history. Read “Brains of the Nation” by the Filipino historian Resil Mojares. He strives to be fair to Paterno but there is no getting around the fact that even Paterno’s contemporaries, including Jose Rizal, thought he was an embarrassment and his ethnographies utter nonsense. Paterno’s theories were also Tagalog-centric. He wanted a glorious past for the Philippines that would glorify himself. He claimed to be of Tagalog nobility yet he negotiated the Pact of Biyak na Bato on behalf of the Spanish government so that he could demand a Spanish title of no less than Duke and a Grandee of Spain with a seat in the Spanish Senate. He was a traitor who was criticized by a lot of Filipinos before I ever wrote about him.
• Daly said that “no one, including Filipinos, cannot post their feedback whether neutral, positive or negative” on my web article.
This is deliberately misleading. If Daly had looked for a comment box, she must have seen the “feedback” link, which is on all my articles at pilipino-express.com. Anyone can click on that link and have a dialogue with me personally, but I suspect that is not what Daly wanted to do. We do not have public comment boxes on our website because, more often than not, they are used for anonymous attacks and ranting.
I appreciate Perla Daly’s desire, and the desire of all Filipinos, to explore their pagka-Pilipino, but what more can I say on that issue that Daly would not interpret as my being condescending? I will say that there is a beautiful quote on Perla Daly’s blog that I had never heard before. It says best what I have tried to say at the conclusion of many of my articles:
“The possession of knowledge does not kill the sense of wonder and mystery. There is always more mystery.” – Anais Nin
I am not a Filipino but I am a fellow human being. I am curious about many things, one of them being Filipino culture. I do not seek facts to kill wonder and mystery. Knowledge, not belief, leads us to even greater wonders and mysteries. And with that knowledge we can truly appreciate those greater wonders and mysteries. This is my spirituality. If Perla Daly dismisses it is as merely a tool for mockery, then none of what I have said here will ever change her mind.
-Paul Morrow, April 11, 2010.
Yeah, I pretty much agreed with Paul since his first articles. He presented his facts in a most objective view. I’d understand that if your whole spirituality and belief system is based on something and then someone out of left field disproves half the theory one would be upset, but even in this retort by Paul, he still outlines his logic in a reasonable manner.
The articles he wrote in the Bathala Code series were quite blunt, but they were also backed by his research. Overall, fellow Baybayin writers, you should all read his Bathala Code articles. They’re a great read. Also, read Perla’s Bathala Meditations too, they’re also a great read. During my workshops, I would always talk about the Bathala-Baybayin relationship, but never in the sense as outlined by Bathala Meditations; rather, I would make the analogy that both Bathala, the original pre-christian god of the Filipinos, and Baybayin, the original pre-colonization script of the Filipinos, followed a similar fate in that through the trials and tribulations of colonization, both have been forgotten by the majority of the fellow Kababayans, but at the same time, STILL exist through the surviving spirit that carries them both. I think when Christian posted my interview and I said this, Paul saw this and mistook me as another Bathala-Baybayin follower, as stated in his reply to the interview. But I digress…
Before Christ, we thought Bathala, our god, looked liked us. Our idea of divinity and greatness back then reflected ourselves, rather than an imposed, foreign ideology. Baybayin, in my opinion, can be used as a visual metaphor for this inner-greatness we once believed since both aspects are pre-colonial.
Anyways, Perla does good work, and Paul Morrow is someone I’ve always looked up to as an inspiration, ever since I found his website when I was 18, looking for some articles on Baybayin writing. I take nothing away from either of them, but I do share both their views and thus have my own. Kudos to Paul, I hope he continues to write, and I hope Perla can take this all in and adapt. There’s nothing worse than when a belief is challenged and ears turn deaf to them.
I hope this opens a dialog between both Paul and Perla; I think that great things could come from collaborative articles and discussions between them.
David – The Bathala Project
Here is more about Pedro Paterno from another FIlipino historian. It’s a recent article by Ambeth Ocampo.
I’m going to come across as harsh here against Perla Daly, but I am bothered by this notion she seems to have that all Filipinos share this incredible philosophy and mode of thinking, when Filipinos are no more monolithic in thought than Americans are. It’s rather bold she accuses Paul Morrow of narrow thinking when in my opinion she’s just as guilty.
There’s something about her demonization of Paul Morrow here that doesn’t sit right with me. It’s very agressive and standoffish. For someone whose ideals espouse unity and philosophical thought, it’s very “You believe my way, or you can leave” to me. As Paul says, you can believe there is a mystical quality behind the Baybayin, as well as Filipino languages, but to claim this is how our ancestors thought is to me absurd. Without historical evidence to back her theories up, all they are are her opinions.
So, we can say that Jews 400 years ago held their script sacred, and that each letter had a deeper meaning, because there is plenty of written evidence through the philosophical discussions between rabbis and in rabbinical commentary. We have the sofer (scribes permitted to write Torah and other sacred Jewish writings) who can tell you the history, meaning, and laws behind writing each character. In other words, we have documented proof. With Baybayin, and Perla Daly’s theories we do not have evidence (at least any that she has presented) that 400 years ago our ancestors had deep philosophical discussions over the nature and meaning of the Baybayin as they relate to the Filipino psyche and religious thought.
I’m probably too pragmatic here, but I find it hard to believe that our ancestors were ascribing deep meanings to each letter when documentation indicates that the script held a far more pragmatic role. Those cultures that hold the written word to be sacred keep sacred texts. Please do not go into “The Spanish Friars burned them all!” as there is no proof that there were any texts like the Aztec codices. While the Spanish may have been zealots they were careful to note such things. If our ancestors held the script to be this great and sacred vehicle, then why has there only been one copperplate document found (of a very mundane nature)? It is not like the technique would have been foreign to our ancestors with the amount of trading they did across SE Asia.
I’m perfectly fine to accept that her beliefs put a deeper meaning behind the letters of the Baybayin. That’s great and good on her, but I refuse to accept that she speaks for all of us Filipinos and that she knows how things were hundreds of years ago (especially as our ancestors were far more diverse culturally then than we are now). But, of course, what do I know, being half Pinoy and raised as a white boy?
Ur such an utu_uto Just taking morrow’s word for it that daly attacked him. I c that U didnt evn read the post thst daly wrote. She wrote one sentncse and didnt even mention Morrows name once. Der was no demonization on her part as allegd by white guy. Only morrow himslf took it to thst level with his silly ling prgrphs and he is the one who spun all the accusstions that daly never once threw at him. Morrow is the one making the accusatiins agnst himself. This is all such a molehill turned mountain by white defensive dude mortow getting piniys to say mean things about each other. Csnt u see whats going on, sheep!
Every time I read ur first line I just think ur so westernized na. Nothing wrong with that of course. But really dude did u even read anything daly wrote? Or did u just take ur cue from the white guy? Ur a pinoy thinking like tge colonizer. Nothung wrong with thst. Like I say here, white guy has successfully gotten us Pinoys to fight each other with words. Something wrong with that— why? Whats the imperialists’ strategy? Oh yeah, stupid me… its ‘Divide and conquer.’ Can you see what’s going on mga kapatid? Nice going, Morrow!
There is a minor typo error in my article above. Paterno invented the Bathala/baybayin idea in 1887 not 1884. That is my mistake not Christian’s.
I do not intend to refute your evidence, Paul Morrow. Your evidence is all valid! I just think it was imbalanced and I wanted to speak up. Of course it’s all controversial. But there is no need for taking sides. Just reviewing sides and weighing both for their validity.
I am also not trying to present or create any proof that what we interpret today of the baybayin is exactly what our ancestors believed in years past. I do not have the resources or tools for that. The blog is an exploration. For example, there is the post on “Fertility Symbols, Feminine Principle and BA” it explores the similarity between the shapes of what are feminine symbols of fertility and also of the baybayin of “ba.” Its the interpretation of images.
To state that I am “demonizing” or creating “us against them” is a subjective interpretation on your part. That’s already been done by our colonizers against the local priestess and shaman. Shall we continue this against each other? I will not participate in it but if you believe I have then I will not participate in it any further.
What I would like to do is continue the open response and exploration of baybayin as not only a historical curiosity but also a meaningful tool.
I just want the deeper meanings of baybayin explored and shared. Thus the creation of Babaylan Alive blog.
I appreciate all your work that you have done in the past and have learned from them. I have certainly also said that in my blog and responses—did you notice that? I hope you noticed that here, now.
I believe in dialogue that is fair and tempered. Not riled up and distorted. Maybe someday we can talk on the phone or speak face to face. Finally… to speak to you in person. What a relief that would be.
btw, the post that you’re responding to Paul, is quite short… the last paragraph, which is about 1/4 of the article merely says this:
“Most westerners cannot comprehend wholly Filipinos’ philosophy, applications and interpretations of “Bahala na,” Bahala and Bathala.
For a recent example of this, please see Morrow’s sensationalized trivialization of Filipino beliefs called “Da Bathala Code”(the play between Filipinos’ accents of “the” and the title of the controversial Dan Brown novel is not lost on us as part mockery, part tongue-in-cheek) at: http://www.pilipino-express.com/history-a-culture/in-other-words/483-the-bathala-code-part-2.html or download this pdf. Unfortunately, his online article does not allow any dialogue to take place with the public. No one, including Filipinos, cannot post their feedback whether neutral, positive or negative.”
I invite you, Paul, and all who have read and want to comment to reread, or to read at all, the article and the comments at: http://baybayinalive.blogspot.com/2010/03/sikolohiyang-pilipino-baybayin-of.html
Oh, and Christian, thanks for bridging the dialogue.
Well, I honestly don’t know what to say. If I say more, it will probably just make things worse. Nevertheless, I will try.
You say that you believe in dialogue that is fair and tempered and then you re-post your accusations that I am trivializing Filipino beliefs, mocking Filipino accents and that I don’t allow comments on my article.
You say that my impression of your “us-against-them” attitude is a subjective interpretation on my part. I think your repetition of these accusations bears out my impression. I’m not the one getting riled up but I should be. And where did I distort? I quoted your accusations word for word and answered your accusations point-by-point.
You say that you are “not trying to present or create any proof that what we interpret today of the baybayin is exactly what our ancestors believed in years past.” What else are your readers supposed to think if you present all your “explorations” as ancient Filipino spirituality without saying explicitly that they are really just your modern-day opinions? When I don’t have clear evidence in my articles I say so, or I add qualifiers.
You say that my article was “unbalanced.” Why? Because I don’t support your particular opinion? Even if I gave a thoroughly complimentary account of your opinions, my article would still not be “balanced” because there are millions of other people with opinions, too.
If we conveniently ignore evidence, then everybody’s opinion must be valid. Unfortunately, it seems that the current Western trend toward relativism demands exactly that. Everybody’s opinion is valid and cold hard facts are reduced to merely “opinions” – and people who demand evidence are called “intolerant” and “narrow-minded.”
I can accept criticism when I make mistakes and omissions. I welcome it. It has happened before and it has helped me improve my writing. But I am not obligated to respond, point-by-point, to baseless accusations, even though I have done just that in the article above.
Kasaysayan lang ‘to, dapat walang personalan.
Ang dito na naman, here is Morrow blowing everything out of proportion na naman. He must like the attention. Drama talaga!
Paul, this is not a closed door. It’s hard that the comments have to be between two blogs. I welcome the dialogue and appreciate your conclusion. please visit the blog post in question (Baybayin Alive, not here) and see my last comment.
Paul Morrow, your conclusion includes this: “Knowledge, not belief, leads us to even greater wonders and mysteries. And with that knowledge we can truly appreciate those greater wonders and mysteries. This is my spirituality.”
You’re work depends on books that you could get your hands on.
I invite you to explore something outside of written knowledge that can only be found in books, that is, oralist knowledge and tacit knowledge, something that Filipinos, especially those still in the Philippines, can be comfortable with. You’re probably not going to find that kind of knowledge in my little humble blog, only references to them, since I am still exploring and learning too, but hopefully, you’ll venture your knowledge finding in those areas or possibly work with those who would. Christian Cabuay has gone to the Philippines to research more on baybayin, and he may very well find out things that you and I both could never find out from books or conjectures.
Again, wishing you blessings on your lakaran.
Mabuhay—Life and Light.
I think that, in this case, “gnosis” is a more correct term than “tacit knowledge” for what you describe, or perhaps simply “culture”.
Perla, I have defended everything I wrote. I should not have to defend written knowledge itself. Nevertheless, I will because I think it is important. Believing in unfounded stories may make some people feel “comfortable,” as you say, and in many cases it is harmless, but sometimes, when history is manipulated, it can be used as a weapon for unspeakable evil. Let me make it clear that I do not think that you or Paterno’s Bathala/baybayin theory is evil, but your total rejection of facts does make me “uncomfortable.”
Who or what is a more reliable witness to the past? Modern descendents who share hearsay stories about the past with little or no knowledge of their true source, or the recorded words and deeds of their own ancestors and other people who actually lived in the time in question and observed the events? Should we ignore them simply because they are in stuffy old books?
Primary sources are the most direct and reliable way to learn about concepts and beliefs of the past without owning a time machine. Even actual artefacts are better understood if we can read what the original users said about them. Primary sources can also be inaccurate and biased, which is why we must compare different sources to find contradictions and make interpretations to balance out the biases. But without any sources at all, we are just inventing the past.
You said that my work “depends on books that [I] could get [my] hands on,” implying that I have not read or listened to all the sources connected to the subject. This is probably true. If you know of any other primary sources that contradict what I have written, you should share them with the world. Please don’t think that I believe my sources are superior to oral history simply because they are written in book form by “important” authors.
Yes, we can learn from oral history and I would eagerly listen to oral historians on subjects they really know something about, but in this case, there are none. To have an oral history about something, we must know that there is an unbroken lineage of oral historians who kept the knowledge alive from the time in question until today. We know definitely that Pedro Paterno’s theory does not have this lineage. Nobody mentioned a connection between Bathala and baybayin in the 300 years of documented history before Pedro Paterno invented it. This is not mere “conjecture” as you call it.
How could even the most respected oral historian possess ancient knowledge about a concept from 500 years ago that apparently nobody, even the best scholars, knew about in Paterno’s day, just 123 years ago? If it were part of oral history, the Filipino writers of the time would have known about it. Filipinos like Jose Rizal would not have criticized Paterno. Rizal even said, “that no Tagalog knew about the word Bathala.” Was it a secret? No.
Barry said it best: “Those cultures that hold the written word to be sacred keep sacred texts.” If they had sacred texts, and if the Spaniards had zealously suppressed them, it still would not be a secret because the Spaniards were proud of their work destroying all so-called “works of the devil.” They would have written about their suppression of this native belief.
It is obvious that there is no direct line of knowledge between the oral historians of today and their ancestors who actually used the baybayin script. Implying that I am intolerant of oral history is just a smoke screen to hide that fact.
Christian Cabuay will learn a lot in the Philippines but it will reflect the current knowledge and opinions about of the ancient baybayin, which are already well disseminated throughout the world. The Philippines, however, is the place to meet the true modern users of a baybayin-like script, the Mangyans of Mindoro and some inhabitants of Palawan. As far as I know, they never worshiped the Tagalog Bathala and the shapes of their letters have not retained the important features that are vital to the Bathala/baybayin theory, which they should supposedly hold dear to this day.
As for tacit knowledge, it does not enter into this issue. As I understand the term, tacit knowledge refers to knowledge that is difficult or impossible to pass on in words – orally or written – like riding a bike. You can only learn it through contact, training and practice with somebody who has the knowledge. Or you can just figure it out on your own.
The Bathala/baybayin connection is obviously not tacit knowledge since you and I have both been writing about it and it seems that the concept is easy enough for others to understand without special training. It is not an indescribable, innate skill. It is not “silent” knowledge. It is a claim of fact that has been circulated for only 123 years. Just because we might “feel” that it might be true does not make it true. Perhaps you have your own definition of “tacit knowledge.”
Perla, you may think that I am stubbornly ignoring some important facets of Filipino culture, but I have already spent too much time patiently explaining my reasoning to you and I would be a fool to go any further. Meanwhile, you have stubbornly ignored all my explanations. All that you have offered in response could be summed up simply as, “Paul Morrow doesn’t know what he is talking about.” That just doesn’t cut it – even if it is dressed up in a condescending invitation to “explore” what I apparently don’t know.
You are obviously an intelligent, serious person with an inquisitive mind, Perla, but, at the risk of sounding just as condescending as you, I invite you to explore something outside your usual choice of reading material.
Ingat ka rin sa iyong paglalakbay at paggalugad ng kasaysayan at kalinangang Filipino.
Eto na naman. Masyadong dramatick at ma-arte eto si morrow. Kung mayroon condescending, si ginoong puti ang CONDESCENDING lamang. nagsusuka na ako dito
WOW! NEVER THOUGHT THAT WE PILIPINOS HAVE SOME UNIQUE ORIGINALITY. ALTHO THIS IS AN AMAZING SELF-DISCOVERY, I AM MORE FLOORED OF THE THOUGHT THAT THIS HAVE BEEN
KEPT A SECRET TO THE MASSES. NO WONDER THAT WE THE “MODERN” PINOYS ARE LOST INTO LEARNING MORE OF THE FOREIGNS THAN WHAT WE ARE FACTUALLY.
KEEP THE “ANTIENT” OF THE TRUE PHILIPPINES COMING AND HOPE TO SEE THIS IN THEIR
SCHOOL SYSTEMS AS WELL.
I AM ENTRIGUED TO LEARN MORE!!!
I’m back. It took me a while because Baybayin Alive is just one of the things I publish online but here I am again. So, at first I thought I should answer you, Paul, point by point but realized that the various points weren’t the real issue at hand at all. Then an anonymous poster came along at the blog and posted a few scathing remarks, quite similar to your opinions.
So I decided to step outside of the whole opposition aspect and think about the bigger picture—what is my intention to share different things about baybayin, different from the historical and impartial findings about baybayin. Why do I publish several websites for a Filipino/a audience?
Shown in no particular order, these are things that I have to say in response to both Paul and Anonymous and any critics of the Baybayin Alive blog and the concepts it presents:
This blog is the first of its kind about baybayin’s meaning to Filipinos. It is only the first and does not mean that I am the only one with these ideas. There are many Filipinos who believe in the deeper meanings. These ideas were first shared in intimate circles of Filipino baybayin enthusiasts in the Philippines. Later, these ideas trickled to others they trusted who were abroad from the motherland. The baybayin enthusiasts who believe these ideas later decided to come out and share them in public and at schools. I don’t know why they have not published their work online before me but it could be because they did not have the resources.
I am merely one voice among many voices. And because I have experience publishing websites for Filipinas and Filipino causes and for esoteric expressions, and because I believe in the deeper meanings of baybayin and how they affect Filipino identity, i published this blog.
My intention is to connect people with ideas that are outside-of-the-box. What is yours?
Yes, humans can be logical and scientific, but we are also intuitive and emotional. Yes, we have left-brains, but we also have right brains. Yes there is the historical and proven aspects of baybayin, but there is also the unwritten, oral and the yet-to-be-discovered about it too. Yes there is the empirical and material in our lives, but there is also the mystical and the unexplainable. And these are all beautiful and part of us.
Paul and Anonymous (why be so?), previous postings in the blog have answers to your questions and oppositions. I don’t need to bring them link by link here. Just surf through the blog.
…As to your scathing “You do no favour to the true culture and history of the Philippines with this silliness…” Well, my answer is that this blog is just one small aspect of my online work. I am certainly giving voice to a minority opinion, but this minority, foolish or not, needs a voice online. and I will risk this little blog in order to give them that voice. I feel i server my kapwa fellow filipino with this and also my other online works that have nothing to do with baybayin—with pinay.com, pakikipagkapwa.net, babaylan.com, CFBS and other sites.
…all voices deserve a chance to be let out and heard, and you would be doing humanity a service if you would practice non-violence (ahimsa*) to those who ventured forth and dared to be different.
Paul/Anonymous, human existence is multi-dimensional. From my point of view, obviously, to share esoteric aspects of our beliefs or findings about anything is NOT to any degree a foolishness. Rather to ignore, block off, deny different aspects of my human experience would be to me, cowardice, and to me would be the “outright foolishness.”
*Ahimsa, means non-violence in words and action.
Even scientists can embrace mystical human experience:
The most beautiful and most profound experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the sower of all true science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead. To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their primitive forms – this knowledge, this feeling is at the center of true religiousness. ( Albert Einstein – The Merging of Spirit and Science)
Paul, didn’t you take not that I am holding out my hand to you with the intention to create connections and cultivate pakikipagkapwa? When you continue to express your difference of opinion with the intention of battle and annihilating your opposition, then you create separation and walls. This is an old paradigm that does not serve either of us, Baybayin enthusiasts or our humanity. I invite you to discourse in the spirit of friendship—let’s be agreeable even if we disagree?
Perla darling, here’s some words of wisdom:
”Do not give dogs what is holy; and do not throw your pearls before swine…” -Matt. 7: 1,2
Oo nga! huwag itapon ang mga perlas sa mga baboy! At huwag ibasura mo si miss perla diyan kay ginoong puti yabang morrow. Beh!
Good day to all readers, and I bow myself to the spirited author!!!
I, Rev Alfonso O Gilbero, a Bathalaichal Chief minister of a registered church named in visayan version as” BALAANG TABERNAKULO SA HARING LANGITNON, Inc., an acroname BTHL-BATHALA, SEC. reg. no. CN201025018, central office Brgy. Bagumbayan, Hilongos, Leyte.
As I read the past columns, the author received of so many critics of an opposite mind commented his credibility as competent author of the Baybayin / Bathala code, just like the heat of fire a very useful material to refined in a pure gold, In my independent mind, I quoted in bible Deuteronomy 4:7-8; In one nation there is one own God like JEHOVA, wherein we can call anytime. As the reality of this verses, in muslin Islam Allah, chinese budhism, Budha, India sankrit Brahma, Persia Ahura Mazda and in Greek tetragramaton YHWH called Yahweh by adding vowel letters of the Greek scholars.
In my own view the baybayin / Bathala Code, is reliable sources of facts of the original treasures of civilization in the far east and a golden remnant of an ancient Pilipino forefathers believing one God creator’,used their tongues to talked tagalog alphabet BTHL, can be read as BATHALA not adding vowel letters unlike Greek tetragramaton YHWH.. In addition verses in the bible Jeremiah 34:15, To build the church in the name of God. it was BATHALA in the Phippines.
Dr. Jose Rizal the pride of maalayan races cited in his childhood poem, Sa aking Kababata”
Kapag ang taoy hindi marunong magmahal ng kanyang sariling salita ay mas mabaho pa sa malantsang isda.. In other wise saying said; Kapag ang taoy hinde marunong tumingin sa kanyang pinanggalingan ay hinde makararating sa kanyang paparoonan.
Thank you! God BATHALA be with us…..and Mabuhay to all Pilipinos !!!!!
xseyong jong hay nseng boj egn eso do no joma ya koram bos tera written by jose san terora bang
um, what’s with mentioning Perla Daly’s name around 8 times in your article, Paul Morrow? Unlike other people who posted here and joined in on criticizing Daly, i read her blog post and her other blogposts. I think she’s right to speak up and defend Filipinos who believe in the deeper meanings of baybayin symbols. And BTW, I think YOU over reacted to her blogpost—you started spinning and creating drama over nothing. cough cough. spit.
did anyone note that all the long criticizing remarks on Paul Morrow came from Paul Morrow? I took the time to read Perla Daly’s blog post after I read this feature article of Paul Morrow and I just notice how the brief mention of the gist of his article in Perla Daly’s blog has been spun into long phrases of harsh criticism against Paul Morrow, written by Paul Morrow, and criticism against Perla Daly, written by Paul Morrow. Perla Daly has not mentioned his name at all in her blog post and Paul Morrow does a weird and very unprofessional thing here by mentioning Perla Daly’s name almost 10 times. He sure created a mountain out of a molehill.
agreeing with da latest commnt & adding dat Mr. Paul Morrow’s featured article here at baybayin.com was much less professionally written then it was very much so emotionally written.
As a recent member of the Center for Babaylan Studies I started reading PDaly’s Baybayin Alive blog. I came across the article she wrote and cross-linked to Paul Morrow’s feature articles and this blogpost. I get the impression that the earlier commenters here at this blogpost ddnt even take time to read Perla Daly’s bbyn blog much less her one blog post that Morrow is responding too. tsk tsk. I agree with most of the latter comments here. Morrow comes across less like a rational journalist and more like a long-winded ranting, emotionally immature juvenile on a highschool debate team who takes a phrase and spins it around to his own self-aggrandizement and pitiful self-illusions. (Sheesh, he even created a fanpage for himself—-why?!!!) in my very humble opinion, Paul Morrow’s “contribution” to baybayin’s popularity has hit the ceiling—yes, he published about baybayin and created his own font a decade or so ago, but now, he hasn’t troubled his puny mind and expanded his approach to baybayin beyond that of a pseudo-wannabe-scholar who brings bbyn to filipino events or posts pictures of himself with filipino celebrities or public figures. As a longtime baybayin enthusiast who has followed Cabuay’s work and other Filipino baybayin artists around the world (Lane Wilken, author of the Pinoy tattoo book, has designed one of my tattoos, and Cabuay another), the bbyn movement today and passion of the pinoy for bbyn has long and since surpassed Morrow’s 1-dimensional perspective and contribution.
Ah sus ah! Masusuka na ako sa kayabangan ni Morrow. Subalit natutuwa ako sa iyong facebook fanpage–bakit naman may fanpage ikaw? Hindi ka naman famous di ba? 667 lang ang pans mo. Nice try. Try-try again nga.
Ginoong Morrow, remember pride goes b4 destruction and haughtiness comes before the fall. Proverbs 16:18 and man, u got alotta haughtiness hawt hot air
I am doing a paper on baybayin at my school and found this shit here.. I read moron’s first paragraph… “First of all, none of Perla Daly’s comments challenged the evidence I presented in the articles and generally she dismisses evidence-based arguments as being narrow and incomplete. Instead of refuting what I wrote, Daly chose to cast aspersions on me personally and dismiss me as merely an ignorant Westerner who is not only mocking her theory but all Filipinos and their beliefs. I can only assume this is a tactic that she hopes will bring others to her side through a sense of obligation to their Filipino heritage or through a sense of guilt for their Western heritage..”
so i checked out the link at: http://baybayinalive.blogspot.com/2010/03/sikolohiyang-pilipino-baybayin-of.html.. even me, just a teen could tell morron 00responded wth lots and lots of words to a very short mention of him. here is that short mention:
“Most westerners cannot comprehend wholly Filipinos’ philosophy, applications and interpretations of “Bahala n,” Bahala and Bathala. For a recent example of this, plase see Morrow’s sensatonalized trivialzation of Filiino beliefs called “Da Bathala Code”(the play betwen Filipinos’ accents of “the”and the title of the controversial Dan Brown novel is not lost on us as part mocery, part tongue-in-cheek)…
the above mention of him occupies only a few lines of space. it mentions Morrow’s name ONCE. just once. I can’t help but see that Morron mentions Daly a thousand times… okay. dope . just maybe 10 times. but still. what’s with that. it’s like he wants to make revenge on the Daly chick with a vengeance, poison gas and warheads.
and i then i read all the rest of Morron’s really long featured post. it’s really stupid shit and trash talk and trying to sound like logicall arugments and basically just illustrating to me, a stupid messed up kid, how Morron freaked out over the mere mention of his name in a not so illustrious complimentary kinda way at the other lady’s blog.. shit what’s with that ego trip freak.
then i read the posts. really funny how the first responders didn’t even read what Morron was really responding to. they actually believed all the shit he had spat out in the blog. .So i really enjoyed how some of these other pinoyes cut into morron with some dope choice words. my cousins translated most of the pinoy shit. snap!
Morron argues all this shit and accusing Daly of all this stupid stuff like “cast aspersions on me personally and dismiss me as merely an ignorant westerner: and what else… “dismisses evidence-based arguments.as narrow and incomplete” and writing a whole stupid response to her three lines of text.
shit! i’m only 16 and even I can see that this dude is freaking out with lots and lots of words thinkig he’s sounding logical and smart.. he’s just a sick egotistical bitch and all around ass.
yeah sure.. make some fonts.. who cares… got some pictures of yourself wtih some pinoyes movie stars and singers. crap that dope. it’s dumb. you’re dumb. shit this.