I think this is a good opportunity to point out a major issue with historiography of the Philippines. That is, when people talk about Philippine independence they are doing so through the lens of mainly the Tagalog people, and to a lesser extent some other groups such as Bisayans. This naarative is of course quite dominant today probably in no small part because the most powerful groups in the Philippines are lowlanders in Luzon, which is where the Filipino Revolution took place. Many of the other parts of the Philippines are just ignored in historical narratives. The Filipino war of independence in 1896 is thought of as a defining moment for Filipinos because of these narratives, but in this post I am going to push back at that idea a bit.

That successful war of independence was simply one in a long line of rebellions and wars fought in the Philippines against the Spanish. That war was also a Tagalog war. What I mean by that is that the Katipunan was a group of elites from various Filipino backgrounds, but they were centered in Maynila. The movement was not exactly a national independence war (though upon defeating the Spanish, a Filipino republic was declared, the first republic in Asia, with Emilio Aguinaldo as president). This is important to keep in mind once I point out another part of the critique: not all of the Philippines was under Spanish control, or at least much of it was contested. Mindanao was very contested land, and Sulu was actually never incorporated into the "country" until the American colonial period. The highlands of Luzon were also not incorporated until the American period. These areas fought more or less constant conflicts against the Spanish from the 1500s up through that independence war in 1896. So, in fact, the Philippines already had a long tradition of revolt against the Spanish, and about half of the territory was either unconquered or fairly contested. Of the other half, much of it was relatively loosely administered and didn't actually have many Spaniards in it. In fact, for example, it wasn't until 1849 that official surnames were even adopted by Filipinos. This is mainly where the Spanish surnames in the Philippines originated; Jose Rizal himself did not have the same surname as his parents.

On the topic of influential revolts, it was a Cavite (another Taglog region) revolt in 1872 that helped inspire Jose Rizal. He dedicated Noli me tangere to the three Filipino secular priests that were executed in the wake of that revolt. The historian Cesar Adib Majul also discussed in fairly great detail what he called the Moro Wars against colonialists, which he broke up into six stages. Historiography has often ignored the "other half" of the Spanish Philippines, that is the areas that remained Muslim throughout the period. The sort of deification of actors such as Bonifacio, Aguinaldo, Luna, etc. is a willful ignorance of the fact that not only had there been other successful Filipino commanders against the Spanish, but that the celebrated war was a fairly regional thing. Basically, what I am trying to get across is that the Philippines was not an idle place, accepting the colonization. There had been active revolts and wars throughout the colonial period, and they clearly inspired each other.

References:

The Promise of the Foreign: Nationalism and the Technics of Translation in the Spanish Philippines by Vicente L. Rafael

Muslims in the Philippines by Cesar Adib Majul