The Dual Criteria of Marx’s Critique of Religion

[Abstract] According to the traditional view, there exists a rupture or rejection between Marx’s ideological system and religious consciousness; the gospel spirit of religion constitutes a weakening and containment of the movement for human emancipation. This is an ahistorical and abstract arbitrary judgment. Religion is an indispensable nutritional germ plasm of Western civilization. On the criterion of ultimate value, there is a hidden logical connection between the vision of the realm of freedom and the messianic idea; both are the high ground of humanity’s demand for freedom. However, Marx’s theory of human emancipation is not a literal translation of the religious concept of salvation. On the criterion of economic science, Marx criticized the illusory, inverted, and conservative nature of the religious mode of reflection, restored the ontological truth that religion had concealed, suppressed, and distorted, opened up the pathway to a secular kingdom, and completed the replacement of the Christian history of salvation with the history of labor emancipation.

〔摘要〕按照传统观点，马克思思想体系与宗教意识之间存在着断层或拒斥关系，宗教福音精神构成了对人类解放运动的消弱与遏制，这是一种非历史的抽象妄断。宗教是西方文明不可或缺的营养胚基，在终极价值尺度上，自由王国之图景与弥赛亚理念之间存在着隐秘的逻辑关联，它们都是人类自由诉求的制高点。然而，马克思的人类解放学说并非宗教救赎观的原版直译。在经济科学尺度上，马克思批判了宗教反思方式的虚幻性、颠倒性和保守性，把被宗教隐匿、压制和歪曲的本体真相还原，敞开了通向世俗天国的通途，完成了基督教救赎史向劳动解放史的置换。

[Keywords] religion; critique; economic science; ultimate value; criterion

〔关键词〕宗教;批判;经济科学;终极价值;尺度

Engels pointed out: “Christianity and the socialism of the workers both preach salvation from servitude and poverty; Christianity seeks this salvation in the afterlife beyond death, in the heavenly kingdom, while socialism seeks it in the present world, in the transformation of society.” [1]1 Engels, “On the Early History of Christianity” (1894-1895), in *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, vol. 27, p. 457. The quotation contrasts Christian otherworldly salvation with socialist this-worldly social transformation. (p. 457) From the perspective of the non-identity relationship between religion and existence, religion possesses transcendence and negativity. The otherworldly realm longed for by theologians is precisely the most sublime state of metaphysical ultimate concern; it constitutes the native ground of the theory of human emancipation. In the radical logical analysis of the structure of material production and exchange, Marx issued a dazzling discourse of salvation, thereby translating the messianic idea into the ideal of the realm of freedom. From the perspective of the identity relationship between religion and existence, religion is an ideology that maintains the ruling order; it conceals and evades the contradictions, fissures, and disharmonies of the social organism. Taking economic science as his coordinate, Marx carried out a historical-phenomenological reduction of religion’s dependent ontology within the spatiotemporal structure of economic activity, unfolding a critique and transcendence of religious ideology from the dual criteria of ultimate value and economic science.

恩格斯指出:“基督教和工人的社会主义都宣传将来会从奴役和贫困中得救;基督教是在死后的彼岸生活中，在天国里寻求这种得救，而社会主义则是在现世里，在社会改造中寻求。”［1］(P457)从宗教与存在的非同一性关系上说，宗教具有超越性和否定性，神学家所祈盼的彼岸世界，正是形而上学终极关怀最超然的境界，它构成了人类解放理论的原生地。在对物质生产与交换结构激进的逻辑分析中，马克思发出了炫目的救赎话语，从而把弥赛亚理念转译为自由王国之理想。从宗教与存在的同一性关系上说，宗教是维护统治秩序的意识形态，它遮蔽和回避社会有机体的矛盾、裂缝、不协调之病症。马克思以经济科学为坐标，在经济活动的时空结构中对宗教的依生本体进行了历史现象学还原，从终极价值与经济科学双重尺度上，展开了对宗教意识形态的批判与超越。

I. From the “Messiah” to the “Realm of Freedom”

一、从“弥赛亚”到“自由王国”

The 16th to 19th centuries constituted a new era fundamentally different from the Middle Ages. The most notable feature of this century was: “People almost unreservedly believed that the next step in history would lead us to the goal we were destined to achieve. From Kant’s belief that he had initiated a ‘Copernican revolution,’ to Hegel’s dialectical schema of God writing his autobiography in history and nature, to Comte and Spencer’s use of evolutionary theory to explain the structure of human society, to Marx’s socialist utopian dream, the intellectual world almost unanimously agreed on a beautiful vision of the future.” [2]2 The “Copernican revolution” refers to Kant’s claim in the *Critique of Pure Reason* (1781) that objects must conform to our cognition, analogous to Copernicus’s shift from a geocentric to a heliocentric model. Hegel’s “God writing his autobiography” alludes to his view of history as the self-unfolding of the Absolute Spirit. Comte and Spencer represent 19th-century positivist and evolutionary theories of social progress. (p. 2) Amid the triumphant song of historical evolutionary optimism, various theories of liberation that placed great hope in future generations replaced Christian eschatology. The logic of liberation theory underwent an evolutionary progression from the theological concept of salvation, to the modern rationalist concept of salvation, and finally to Marx’s historical materialist concept of labor salvation.

16到19世纪是一个同中世纪迥然相异的新时代，这个世纪最显著的特征是:“人们几乎毫无保留地相信历史下一步将引导我们实现我们已被注定要达到的目标。从康德相信自己发动‘哥白尼式的革命’，到黑格尔关于上帝在历史和自然中书写自传的辩证图式，到孔德和斯宾塞用进化论解释人类社会结构，再到马克思的社会主义乌托邦之梦，知识界几乎一致认同美好的未来观。”［2］(P2)在历史进化乐观主义的凯歌声中，对后世寄予厚望的诸种解放理论取代了基督教末世论，解放理论之逻辑经历了从神学主义拯救观到近代理性主义拯救观再到马克思历史唯物主义劳动拯救观的思维演进行程。

To clarify the path of Marx’s thought from the abstract appeal of religious belief to the objective logic of labor emancipation, it is necessary to trace back to the long and solemn history of Western religious salvation. In the view of ancient Greek historians, history only involved regression and cycles, “lacking a sense of development. When they spoke of primitive times, they rarely felt those times were primitive, but rather poetically beautified them.” [3]3 The reference is to the cyclical view of history in ancient Greek thought, as opposed to the linear, progressive view introduced by Christianity. (p. 150) Christianity, as a universalist and salvationist holistic value system, was concentrated in the depiction of Augustine’s *City of God*. The Christian theological view of history, colored by the worldwide colonial rule of the Roman Empire and the Stoic consciousness of world citizenship, broke through the closed and narrow nationalist fetters of Judaism, moving history from homogeneous repetition to heterogeneous evolution and accumulation. Although the basis for demonstrating the legitimacy and authority of the medieval state system and political order all came from God, and was not discovered within history itself, the significance of the theological worldview in structuring historical logic was, as W. Thompson said: “Christianity began to become conscious of history.” [4]4 W. Thompson is likely William Irwin Thompson (1938-2020), an American social philosopher and cultural historian, though the specific work is not identified here. The claim is that Christianity introduced a self-conscious historical perspective. (p. 181) In the late Middle Ages, with the replacement of the agricultural economy by a commodity-exchange society, religious belief, which had possessed sacredness and eternity, was caricatured, purely intellectualized, and secularized. These new forces, different from tradition, forced the Middle Ages to transcend themselves.

要澄明马克思从宗教信念的抽象诉求转换到劳动解放的客观逻辑之运思路径，有必要回溯到悠远而凝重的西方宗教救赎史。在古希腊历史学家的视野中，历史只有倒退与循环，“没有发展感，他们谈到原始时代时，他们很少觉得那些时代是原始的，而是把它们诗意地加以美化”［3］(P150)。基督教作为一种普世主义和救赎主义的整体价值观，聚焦在奥古斯丁《上帝之城》的图绘中。以罗马帝国的世界性殖民统治和斯多葛的世界公民意识为基色的基督教神学历史观，冲破了犹太教封闭狭小的民族主义羁绊，使历史从同质重复走向异质进化与累增。尽管论证中世纪国家制度和政治秩序合法性和权威性的依据均来源于神，并非在历史本身中发现的，但是，神学世界观在架构历史逻辑上的意义如W·汤普森所说:“基督教开始在历史上自觉”［4］(P181)。中世纪末期，伴随商品—交换社会对农业经济的取代，具有神圣性和永恒性的宗教信仰被漫画化、纯理智化和世俗化了，这些不同于传统的新质力量，迫使中世纪越出自身。

The Enlightenment merged scientific principles with religious belief, eliminated all irrational factors and accidental elements from the religious system, replaced divine grace with reason, and sought to establish a belief system as flawless as mathematical deductive reasoning. Reason, as a supreme and ontological force, was injected into the reconstruction of religious belief. Thus, the Enlightenment reshaped a new form of religion—rational religion. However, the Enlightenment adopted a metaphysical method of the understanding toward religion, discarding the rich human connotations within the concept of God, resulting in a state of alienation and mutual repulsion between humanity and God, and failing to complete the transformation from God to humanity. The Enlightenment undoubtedly possessed a logical dilemma it could not transcend: the coexistence of secular liberation and spiritual enslavement. On the one hand, the Enlightenment provided a secular version of the Christian doctrines of fall and salvation, lowering the religious ideal of salvation from the illusion of the otherworldly realm to the empirical picture of the this-worldly realm. Accordingly, the heavenly history of salvation was transformed into the history of political liberation. On the other hand, the Enlightenment used knowledge to exclude the human content contained in divine existence, reducing the Absolute to a mechanical, abstract entity, dissolving the soul of the religious spirit, and causing the loss of meaning in human existence. Reason, which had once played the role of savior, degenerated into a chain binding the homeless soul. As Rousseau said: “Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains. He who thinks himself the master of others is indeed a greater slave than they.” [5]5 Rousseau, *The Social Contract* (1762), Book I, Chapter 1. The quotation expresses the paradox of natural freedom and social bondage, a key theme of Enlightenment critique. (p. 8)

启蒙把科学原则与宗教信仰相融合，剔除宗教体系中所有非理性因素和偶然成分，用理智取代神恩，力图建立一种如同数学演绎推理般无懈可击的信仰体系，理智作为一种至上的、本体的力量被注入宗教信念的重构之中。于是，启蒙重新塑造了新形式的宗教——理智性宗教。但是，启蒙对宗教采取的是知性形而上学方法，弃绝了上帝概念中人性的丰富内涵，致使人与神处于疏离和相斥状态，没有完成从神向人的转化。启蒙无疑存在着自身无法超越的逻辑困境:世俗解放与精神奴役并存。一方面，启蒙提供了基督教堕落和救赎教义的世俗版本，使宗教救世理想从彼岸世界之幻念下降为此岸世界之经验图景，据此，天国救赎史转化为政治解放史;另一方面，启蒙用知识排斥神性存在所包含的属人内容，把绝对者简约为机械、抽象的存在物，消解了宗教精神的灵魂，使人的生存意义尽失。理智曾扮演着救世主的角色，却沦落为居无定所的灵魂之锁链，正如卢梭所说:“人是生而自由的，但却无往不在枷锁之中。自以为是其他一切的主人的人，反而比其他一切更是奴隶。”［5］(P8)

German classical philosophy took up the salvific mission of the Enlightenment, reconstructing the rational faith in God, thereby shifting the center of gravity of the Enlightenment.

德国古典哲学承接了启蒙的拯救使命，重建上帝的理性信仰，从而移动了启蒙运动的重心。

German classical philosophy ontologized reason into abstract rational spirit. Those rich human connotations that had been filtered out by the Enlightenment’s rational religion were revived in a speculative and obscure form. Kant’s philosophy of religion was a weak check on the Enlightenment’s religious view of the 18th century, which worshipped science and elevated reason to supremacy. Within the limits of pure reason, Kant erected a clear demarcation between scientific reason and practical reason, blocked the channel linking religion to experience, denied the metaphysical speculative method of proving God’s existence through pure reason, weakened the overly intellectualized tendency of Enlightenment religion, and marked a new direction for German classical philosophy of religion: “The traditional Christian view of revelation, that God reveals himself in history and personal experience through historical events and his Word, was replaced by reason.” [6]6 This describes Kant’s shift from traditional revealed religion to a religion within the limits of reason alone, as developed in his *Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason* (1793). (p. 286) However, Kant confined reason to the finite, unreal phenomenal world; beyond experience, reason could not grasp anything sacred, and could not clarify the existence of God, ultimately failing to escape the net of empiricism. Kant demarcated a sphere for faith, causing reason to split itself between heaven and earth. The fragmentation of reason itself deconstructed the rationalist foundation of religion, causing the construction of rational religion to collapse into nothing.

德国古典哲学把理智本体化为抽象的理性精神，那些曾被启蒙理智性宗教过滤掉的人性之丰富内涵，以思辨而晦涩的形式复活。康德的宗教哲学是对18世纪科学崇拜、理智至上的启蒙宗教观的微弱遏制。康德在纯粹理性限度内，耸立起科学理性与实践理性泾渭分明的界标，阻断了宗教与经验链接的通道，否定了依靠纯粹理性证明上帝存在的形而上学思辨方法，弱化了启蒙宗教的过分理智化倾向，标识着德国古典宗教哲学的新方向:“传统基督教的启示观，即上帝通过历史事件和他的圣言在历史与个人经验中启示他自己，被理性所取代”［6］(P286)。但是，康德把理性驻足于有限的、非真实的现象界，经验之外理性不能把握任何神圣性的东西，无法使上帝存在予以澄明，最终不能逃逸经验论的罗网;康德给信仰划定地盘，造成理性在天国与地界的自我裂变，理性自身的碎片化，解构了宗教的理性主义基础，致使理性宗教的建构化为泡影。

Hegel both recovered and rescued religion. By absorbing the essence of Christianity through absolute reason, he saved Christianity, which had been dismembered by the Enlightenment thinkers. For Hegel, love of and faith in Christ were no longer the basis for the restoration of human nature, and the sublimity and perfection of the City of God were no longer the appearance of divine will, but were realized through the self-sufficient and self-moving process of the absolute reason that creates the world. On the one hand, Hegel corrected the Enlightenment’s moral impotence, emphasizing that religion is an element “indispensable for cultivating great and lofty virtue” [7]7 Hegel, G. W. F. (1982). *Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Religion* [Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion], Vol. 1. Chinese edition: Commercial Press. (p. 21), extending all intellectual, moral, and emotional forces into the concept of God, and achieving the unity of the absolute “human” and the absolute “divine” in the ceaseless rotation of absolute reason. On the other hand, he repaired Kant’s fragmented reason, subsuming scientific reason and practical reason under the same dialectical evolution of absolute reason, and completing the movement of God toward absolute spirit in the interaction between faith and reason. At the apex of the logical deduction of absolute spirit, Hegel’s philosophy achieved the absolute reconciliation of all antagonisms and conflicts in the realms of thought, history, and religion. As Taylor said: “In Hegel’s speculative system, the theological contradiction between salvation through God’s grace and salvation through human freedom is resolved” [8]8 Taylor, C. (1975). *Hegel*. Cambridge University Press. (p. 741).

黑格尔既收复又拯救了宗教，他借助绝对理性吸纳基督教之精髓，从启蒙思想家手中挽救了被肢解的基督教。在黑格尔那里，对基督的爱与信不再是人性复原之根据，上帝之城的崇高与完善也不再是神意的表象，而是由创世的绝对理性在自足自为的推演行程中实现的。黑格尔一方面纠正启蒙的道德无能论，强调宗教是培植“伟大和崇高的德性所决不能缺少的”元素［7］(P21)，把全部理智的、道德的和情感的力量扩展到上帝的概念中，在绝对理性不停息的旋转中实现了绝对的“人”与绝对的“神”的统一。另一方面他又修补了康德破碎的理性，统摄科学理性和实践理性于同一绝对理性的辩证演化之下，在信仰与理性的互动中完成了上帝向绝对精神的趋动。黑格尔哲学在绝对精神逻辑推论的顶端，达到了思维、历史和宗教所有领域一切对抗和冲突的绝对和解，正如泰勒所说:“在黑格尔的思辨体系中，通过上帝的恩赐而得救与通过人的自由而得救之间存在的神学矛盾便得到了解决”［8］(741)。

The belief in reason, humanity, and progress in classical German philosophy both originated from theology and deviated from and transcended it. The transcendence and ideality of the Christian concept of salvation, forming a non-identical bipolar contrast with the existing world, enabled classical German philosophers to sublimate and overcome the defects of the secular world in a speculative manner within the logical framework of reason, transforming God’s salvation into the perfection and harmony of human nature in absolute spirit. However, like the Enlightenment, classical German philosophy contained an irresolvable paradox: it subjected religion to the most devastating critique, yet did not step one iota beyond the bounds of religion; instead, it was trapped in an even more thorough religious form, metamorphosing into a true “theodicy” cloaked in reason. This is undoubtedly the irony of dialectical thinking. What classical German philosophy touched upon was merely a purely philosophical salvation; its astonishing abstraction and speculation pushed the necessity of liberation toward an unattainable otherworldly realm.

德国古典哲学理性、人道、进步之信念既来源于神学又是对它偏离与超越。基督教救赎观的超越性和理想性，与现存世界形成非同一性的两极观照，使德国古典哲学家能够在理性的逻辑构图中，以思辨的方式扬弃并克服世俗世界的缺陷，把上帝之救赎转化为人性在绝对精神中的完满与和谐。但是，如同启蒙一样，德国古典哲学内含着无法自洽的悖结，它对宗教进行最具震慑力的批判，但是并没有越出宗教之雷池一步，反而囿于更彻底的宗教形式中，羽化为披着理性外衣的、真正的“神正论”，这无疑是辩证思维吊诡之所在。德国古典哲学所涉猎的仅仅是纯哲学救赎，其惊人的抽象性和思辨性把解放之必然性推向无法企及的彼岸世界。

The salvific model of the religious worldview, and even of classical German religious philosophy, possessed a captivating allure, but in terms of its practicality, it had only utopian significance. Feuerbach reduced the religious world to its secular basis. He pointed out: “The absolute essence of man, the God of man, is man’s own essence” [9]9 Feuerbach, L. (1984). *Das Wesen des Christentums* [The Essence of Christianity]. Chinese edition: Commercial Press. (p. 471). Feuerbach restored the essence of religion to the essence of man, emphasizing the inevitability of the alienation and restoration of human nature, and striving to achieve salvation at the level of human nature. However, he was satisfied merely with excavating the epistemological roots and psychological mechanisms of religious phenomena; the true ontology on which religion depends remained mysterious to him, ultimately causing the critique of religion to regress to its starting point—the religion of love.

宗教世界观乃至德国古典宗教哲学的拯救模式，具有夺人心魄的诱惑力，但就其实践性而言，仅仅具有乌托邦的意义。费尔巴哈把宗教世界归结为它的世俗基础，他指出:“人的绝对本质、人的上帝就是人自己的本质。”［9］(P471)费尔巴哈把宗教的本质还原为人的本质，强调人性异化与复归的必然性，力图在人性层面上实现得救。但是，他仅仅满足挖掘宗教现象的认识论根源和心理机制，宗教依生的真正本体对他而言是神秘莫测的东西，最终使宗教批判回退到原点——爱的宗教。

The grand salvific goals of modern Enlightenment and classical German religious philosophy once inspired Marx. It was precisely the martyr-like momentum of religion that constituted the purport of Marx’s human emancipation. Marx stripped, distilled, and absorbed the German rationalist concept of salvation. On the logic of material production, he eliminated the utopian character of all salvific goals, forming a theory of human emancipation that combined the principle of dialectical negation with the principle of sensuous reality, ultimately transcending all discourses of liberation, including classical German religious philosophy.

近代启蒙与德国古典宗教哲学气势恢宏的救世目标，曾感染着马克思，正是宗教殉道般的气势，构成了马克思人类解放的旨趣。马克思对德国理性主义救赎观进行了剥离、蒸馏与吸纳，在物质生产之逻辑上，戒除了一切救世目标的空想性质，形成了辩证否定性原则与现实感性原则相结合的人类解放的理论，最终超越了德国古典宗教哲学在内的一切解放话语。

Marx pointed out: humanity’s “first historical act is the production of the means to satisfy these needs, the production of material life itself. And this is a historical act, a fundamental condition of all history, which today, as thousands of years ago, must be accomplished every day and every hour, merely in order to sustain human life” [10]10 Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1995). *Marx-Engels Werke* [Marx-Engels Collected Works], Vol. 1. Chinese edition: People’s Publishing House. (p. 79). The structure of material production contains two aspects: a critical logic and an objective logic, which mutually support and justify each other. The latter provides the economic-scientific basis for the former, avoiding the utopian defect of religious ideals; the former endows the latter with a radical critical force, circumventing the conservatism of religious ideology. Specifically, the logic of production, i.e., the “logic of critique” [11]11 The phrase “logic of critique” refers to the critical dimension within the logic of production, as elaborated by Marx in his critique of political economy. (p. 13), originates from the dialectics of the actual movement of production and exchange. It always maintains a non-identical subversive force against the existing order, and in the ultimate sense, it has a spontaneous, hidden point of connection with the Jewish messianic idea. The logic of production, i.e., the objective logic, is the fundamental mode of human existence and the driving force of history. It opens up the true ontology hidden behind all ideologies, including religion, forming a sharp contrast with the mirror-like, inverted appearance of religion, and giving Marx’s theory of human emancipation an essential distinction from the religious concept of salvation.

马克思指出:人类的“第一个历史活动就是生产满足这些需要的资料，即生产物质生活本身，而且这是这样的历史活动，一切历史的一种基本条件，人们单是为了能够生活就必须每日每时去完成它，现在和几千年前都是这样。”［10］(P79)物质生产结构包含批判逻辑与客观逻辑两个方面，它们相互支撑、相互证成。后者为前者提供了经济科学的依据，避免了宗教理想的乌托邦缺陷，前者使后者具有激进的否定性力度，规避了宗教意识形态的保守性。具体地说，生产的逻辑即“批判的逻辑”［11］(P13)，源于生产与交换实际运动的辩证法，它始终与现存秩序保持着非同一性的颠覆力度，在终极意义上，与犹太弥赛亚理念之间有着自发的、隐秘的终极对接点;生产的逻辑亦即客观的逻辑，是人类基本的生存方式和历史的原动力，它敞开了藏匿于包括宗教在内的所有意识形态背后的真实本体，与镜像式的、颠倒的宗教表象形成鲜明的对质关系，使马克思的人类解放理论与宗教救赎观有了本质性的区别。

In summary, Marx rooted the tragic martyrdom of the Western religious cultural tradition in the sensuous activity of production and exchange. It is precisely within the dual logic of the production structure that the dual criteria of the critique of religion emerge.

总之，马克思把西方宗教文化传统中悲情的殉道精神扎根于生产与交换生动的感性活动中，正是在生产结构的复式逻辑中，生发出宗教批判之双重尺度。

II. The Ultimate Value Criterion of Marx’s Critique of Religion

二、马克思宗教批判的终极价值尺度

In a symbolic sense, there are similarities and affinities between Marx’s ideal of human emancipation and religious eschatology in terms of logical premise, driving force, and dialectical schema. However, Marx’s theory of human emancipation is not a literal translation of the religious concept of salvation. Marx shifted the basis of liberation from divine will to the necessary laws of the relations of production and exchange, sublating the utopian religious fantasy and giving the theory of human emancipation a scientific and radical new form.

在象征性意义上，马克思人类解放之理想与宗教末世论在逻辑前提、动力、辩证图式等诸多方面存在着相通性和亲和力，但是，马克思的人类解放学说并非宗教救赎观的原版直译。马克思把解放的依据从神意移转到生产与交换关系的必然法则中，扬弃了乌托邦式的宗教幻念，使人类解放理论具有了科学的、激进的新形态。

There is no doubt that in the early period of the formation of his worldview, Marx was steeped in religious belief. Although, in terms of duration, the influence of religion on him was fleeting and soon fragmented within his later radical critique of religion, the faint voice of the Jewish prophets exerted an invisible and lasting influence on Marx’s values. In this regard, Jay pointed out: “The messianic idea prevalent in Judaism was given a secular form by Marxism” [12]12 Jay, M. (1984). *Marxism and Totality: The Adventures of a Concept from Lukács to Habermas*. University of California Press. (p. 230). The praise of “Prometheus as the most noble saint and martyr in the philosophical calendar” [10]10 Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1995). *Marx-Engels Werke* [Marx-Engels Collected Works], Vol. 1. Chinese edition: People’s Publishing House. (p. 12) marks Marx’s image as a Christ-like savior.

毋庸置疑的是，在世界观形成前期，马克思承受过宗教信念之浸淫，尽管从时间的持续上看，宗教对他的影响是瞬时即逝的，旋即碎片化于日后对宗教激进批判的逻辑中，但是，犹太先知的微弱之声对马克思价值观的侵染是无形而持久的。对此，杰伊指出:“犹太教中流行的弥赛亚思想，被马克思主义赋予了一种世俗形式。”［12］(P230)“普罗米修斯是哲学历书上最高尚的圣者和殉道者”［10］(P12)之赞誉，标识着马克思救世的基督之形象。

1. The Similarity in Logical Premise between Human Emancipation and Religious Salvation Crisis constitutes the logical premise of both human emancipation and religious salvation.

1．人类解放与宗教救赎在逻辑前提上的相似性危机构成了人类解放与宗教拯救的逻辑前提。

Although religious redemption refers to the crisis of transhistorical, abstract human nature’s fissure, human emancipation refers to the pathological crisis of economic operation. Religion applies the crisis of human nature to the process of salvation through the struggle between good and evil, deriving the rationality of the eternal existence of the heavenly kingdom beyond this world from the necessity of human salvation. In the religious-theological view of history, the world is dichotomized: on one pole is the secular city of sin, suffering, and filth; on the other pole is the city of God of well-being, glory, and purity. The secular world is decayed and degenerate, structured by evil forces such as material desire, hypocrisy, and cunning; humanity is in an alienated state of being “insulted, enslaved, abandoned, and despised” [13]13 “The point is to change the world” — This is a paraphrase of Marx’s famous eleventh thesis on Feuerbach: “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.” (p. 10). The crisis of the fissure of human nature constitutes the necessity of redemption: “Man is saved solely by faith in the grace of God” [14]14 Thomas Müntzer (c. 1489–1525) was a German radical theologian and early Reformation figure who led a peasant uprising against feudal and ecclesiastical authority. (p. 220). Love of and faith in Christ are the effective path to escape the crisis: “Let faith come among them, and sin, death, and hell are assigned to Christ;

尽管宗教救赎指称的是超历史的、抽象的人性裂变之危机，人类解放指涉的是经济运行之病态危机。宗教把人性危机运用于善恶博弈的救世进程中，从人性拯救的必要性中导引出彼岸天国永存之合理性。在宗教神学历史观中，世界被二分化了:一极是罪孽、苦难、肮脏的世俗之城，另一极是福祉、荣耀、洁净的上帝之城。世俗世界是败朽和堕落的，它被物欲、伪善、狡诈等邪恶势力所架构，人处于“被侮辱、被奴役、被遗弃和被蔑视”的异化状态［13］(P10)。人性裂变的危机构成救赎之必要性，“人得救全靠信仰上帝的恩典”［14］(P220)。对基督的爱和信是摆脱危机的有效路径:“让信来到他们中间，于是罪恶、死亡、地狱就归给基督;而恩典、生命、救恩就归给信徒”［15］(P162)。由于基督，人性能够从堕落的黑暗基础上升腾起光明之火炬。马克思危机—革命之路径与宗教具有相似的背景。恩格斯写道:“当革命的风暴横扫整个法国的时候，……无家可归的人挤在大城市的贫民窟里;一切传统的血缘关系、宗法从属关系、家庭关系都解体了;劳动时间、特别是女工和童工的劳动时间延长到可怕的程度;突然被抛到全新的环境中(从乡村转到城市，从农业转到工业，从稳定的生活条件转到天天都在变化的、毫无保障的生活条件)的劳动阶级大批地堕落了。”［16］(P728－729)对于这种催生出宗教般救世信念的土壤，路易斯·J·哈勒指认:“马克思主义适应了城里人对一种新的信仰形式的需要。它适应了对一种工业时代的宗教的需要。”［17］(P387)

Marx, starting from the history of capital’s origin, traces the root of the rampant spread of crisis back to the original sin — primitive accumulation of capital, and he delivers a prophetic indictment of inhuman social phenomena. Marx sharply points out: “The role played by primitive accumulation in political economy is almost the same as that played by original sin in theology” [18]18 The phrase “imaginary flowers” and “illusory sun” are also from the same 1844 text, where Marx describes religion as a fantastic reflection of human suffering. (P820). Primitive accumulation is the original source and initiator of all evil; it historically brought about the separation of the producer from the means of production, and this separation led to capital’s ruthless expropriation of labor. The accumulation of capital and the accumulation of poverty increase in the same proportion, and the inevitable result is: “Accumulation of wealth at one pole is, therefore, at the same time accumulation of misery, agony of toil, slavery, ignorance, brutality, mental degradation, at the opposite pole, i.e., on the side of the class that produces its own product as capital” [18]18 The phrase “imaginary flowers” and “illusory sun” are also from the same 1844 text, where Marx describes religion as a fantastic reflection of human suffering. (P743-744). Marx conducts a Last Judgment on capitalist society, prophesying apocalyptically: “The knell of capitalist private property sounds. The expropriators are expropriated” [18]18 The phrase “imaginary flowers” and “illusory sun” are also from the same 1844 text, where Marx describes religion as a fantastic reflection of human suffering. (P874).

马克思从资本起源史入手，把危机蔓生之根延伸于原罪——资本原始积累，他对非人的社会现象进行了先知式的控诉。马克思尖锐地指出:资本主义“原始积累在政治经济学中所起的作用，同原罪在神学中所起的作用几乎是一样的”［18］(P820)。原始积累是一切罪恶的原发地和始作俑者，它历史地造成了生产者和生产资料分离，这种分离导致了资本对劳动的无情剥夺。资本积累与贫困积累按照同一比例递增，其结果必然是:“在一极是财富的积累，同时在另一极，即在把自己的产品作为资本来生产的阶级方面，是贫困、劳动折磨、受奴役、无知、粗野和道德堕落的积累”［18］(P743－744)。马克思对资本社会进行了末日审判，他启示录式地预言:“资本主义私有制的丧钟就要响了。剥夺者就要被剥夺了。”［18］(P874)

“Communism” and “Messianism” are both pinnacles of humanity’s pursuit of ultimate value; they sound a simultaneous variation on the theme of a world of great harmony for humanity. However, because the grounds for the emergence of crisis differ, the paths for its resolution also diverge. Religion evades existing ills through promises, intoxicating people with insubstantial fantasies, at best counting as a “revolutionary utopia.” In Marx’s view, God is not a rescuer from crisis; social misfortune and suffering do not stem from defects or fractures in human nature, but from reified, alienated social relations. For this reason, he erects a ladder to a secular heavenly kingdom: “The point is to change the world” [13]13 “The point is to change the world” — This is a paraphrase of Marx’s famous eleventh thesis on Feuerbach: “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.” (P57).

“共产主义”与“弥赛亚”都是人类终极价值追求的制高点，它们唱响了人类大同世界的同步变奏曲，但是，由于危机缘生的根据不同，因而对其消解的路径殊异。宗教以诺言回避现存弊端，使人陶醉于非实质性的幻念之中，至多算作“革命式的乌托邦”。在马克思看来，上帝不是危机解救者，社会的不幸与苦难并非源于人性的缺陷或裂变，而是由物化的、异己的社会关系所致，为此，他架设了通向世俗天国的云梯:“问题在于改变世界”［13］(P57)。

2. The Connection between Human Liberation and Religious Salvation in Terms of Driving Force The elimination of crisis and the realization of the goals of human liberation and religious salvation both possess an inherent driving force, although the former originates in productive activity as a mode of human existence, while the latter arises from a mystified, masochistic form of labor activity triggered by self-consciousness.

2．人类解放与宗教救赎在实现动力上的关联性危机的消弭，人类解放与宗教救赎目标之实现，都有着内在的驱动力，尽管前者指发端于作为人类生存方式的生产活动，后者则是由自我意识引发的神秘化的、受虐式的劳动活动。

In Christianity, the progressive model of the unity — division — reunification of human nature originates in the dialectical evolutionary process of the enslavement and freedom of self-consciousness. In the view of theologians, God “is eternal self-consciousness” [19]19 The reference to “predestination or original sin” alludes to core doctrines of Protestant theology, particularly Calvinist predestination, which Weber linked to the spirit of capitalism. (P17), while humans are finite self-consciousness. The event of the forbidden fruit itself contains the dual effects of fall and salvation. In terms of the allegory of the fall, the forbidden fruit event signifies that “the moment humans know good and evil is precisely the moment they descend into depravity” [8]8 Taylor, C. (1975). *Hegel*. Cambridge University Press. (P324). In terms of the allegory of salvation, the self-consciousness obtained at the cost of expulsion from the Garden of Eden is both the basis for abandoning the ignorance of chaotic human nature and clarifying the boundary between good and evil, and the driving force for emerging from the paradox of good and evil to attain salvation — a contradictory process full of suffering and twists. Although humans, expelled from paradise, lose their self-sufficient state of existence, through self-consciousness they are elevated to spiritual beings, making labor possible. “God created humans in his own image, and at the same time created nature for humans to utilize” [11]11 The phrase “logic of critique” refers to the critical dimension within the logic of production, as elaborated by Marx in his critique of political economy. (P47). From then on, labor becomes the self-determined mode of life for humans. The process of material exchange between humans and nature for survival both symbolizes punishment for humanity’s ancestors’ betrayal of God and is a process of human self-salvation. It is precisely through labor that humans are elevated to subjects of history and become their own saviors; it is also precisely through labor, i.e., the externalizing activity of self-consciousness, that humans perceive the necessity of approaching God, achieving the ultimate unity between salvation through God’s grace and self-salvation through labor.

在基督教中，人性的统一——分裂——复合的递进模式是缘起于自我意识的奴役与自由的辩证进化过程。在宗教学家那里，上帝“是永恒的自我意识”［19］(P17)，人则是有限的自我意识，禁果事件本身内含着堕落与拯救双重效应。就堕落的寓意而言，禁果事件喻示着“人明白善恶之日正是人走向堕落之时”［8］(P324)。就拯救的寓意而言，以放逐伊甸园为代价换取的自我意识，既是弃绝人性混沌之蒙昧、澄明善恶之分界的根据，又是走出善恶之悖谬获得拯救的原动力，这是一个充满苦难与曲折的矛盾过程。人被逐出乐园，虽然失去自在自足的生存状态，但是由于自我意识，人被提升为精神性的生命，致使劳动成为可能。“上帝按照自己的形象创造了人，同时又创造了人类利用的自然。”［11］(P47)从此，劳动成为人自为的生命方式。人为了生存而与自然进行物质变换过程，既象征着对人类祖先背叛上帝的惩罚，又是人类的自我拯救过程。正是劳动，人升华为历史的主体，成为自我解救者;也正是劳动，即自我意识的外化活动，使人洞悉趋向上帝的必要性，实现了人性由上帝的恩赐得救与通过劳动自我救赎之间的终极统一。

The dual attributes of fall and salvation contained in religious punitive labor are merely a projection, within the sphere of faith, of the inherent characteristics of human productive activity in the natural historical process. Marx strips away the illusory cloak of religious symbolic labor, replacing theological moral labor with the ontological mode of human existence in reality, endowing labor with the dual attributes of enslavement and liberation, and guiding religious salvation in a de-sanctified direction.

宗教惩戒式劳动含有的堕落与拯救之双重属性，不过是自然历史进程中人类生产活动的内在特质在信仰领域的投射。马克思脱去宗教象征性劳动的虚幻外衣，把神学意义上的道德劳动置换为本体论意义上人的现实生存方式，赋予劳动以奴役与解放的双重属性，导引宗教救赎于非神圣化的方向。

The opposing attributes of labor manifest themselves within the vast productive organism of capital as an organic combination of objectified labor and alienated labor, the two coexisting and co-existing within the same labor process. The objectification of labor is the real foundation for the existence and development of human society, and itself contains the force of human liberation. In his objective account of the logic of capital’s operation, Marx issues a cry of salvation; for this reason, Western scholars call Marx a secular theologian, identifying his theory of political economy as a secular salvific version of the “Apocalypse” [17]17 The term “opium of the people” is a well-known metaphor from Marx’s early work *A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right. Introduction* (1844). It is not a numbered slogan but a classical allusion within Marxist theory. (P386). Alienated labor transforms the essential power of humans into an external force beyond human control and resistance, driving human history along a spontaneous trajectory. Hence, “A society can neither leap over nor abolish by decrees the natural phases of its development, even when it has discovered the natural law of its own movement” [18]18 The phrase “imaginary flowers” and “illusory sun” are also from the same 1844 text, where Marx describes religion as a fantastic reflection of human suffering. (P9-10). Two opposing forces construct the two wings of enslavement and freedom; within the production structure controlled by capital, any freedom simultaneously implies enslavement. Within historically rational limits, the inalienable and unavoidable enslaving force contained in labor “proves the legitimacy of the painful nature of labor” [11]11 The phrase “logic of critique” refers to the critical dimension within the logic of production, as elaborated by Marx in his critique of political economy. (P17). Various different forms of human labor accumulate the irresistible material force necessary for the ultimate reconciliation of social contradictions. In this sense, labor in Marx’s vision also carries the flavor of theological gospel.

劳动所具有的相斥属性在资本庞大的生产机体中表现为对象化劳动与异化劳动的有机结合，二者共生共容于同一劳动过程之中。劳动的对象化是人类社会存在和发展的现实基础，本身孕育着人类解放的力量。马克思在对资本运行逻辑的客观叙述中发出拯救之呐喊，为此西方学者把马克思称为世俗的宗教家，指认其政治经济学理论就是世俗救赎版的“启示录”［17］(P386)。异化劳动使人的本质力量变异为外在于人的不可控制、不可克服的势力，它驱动着人类历史沿着自发的轨迹运行，因而，“一个社会即使探索到了本身运动的自然规律，……它还是既不能跳过也不能用法令取消自然的发展阶段”［18］(P9－10)。两种竞相反向的作用力架构了奴役与自由的两翼，在资本控制的生产结构中，任何自由同时意味着奴役。在历史合理界限内，劳动所包含的无法剥离、无法避免的奴役力量，“证明了劳动的痛苦性质的合法性”［11］(P17)。各种不同形式的人类劳动，积聚起社会矛盾终极和解所必需的势不可挡的物质力量，在此意义上，马克思视野中的劳动同时具有神学福音的韵味。

In summary, for Marx, labor is neither an abstract activity of speculative spirit nor a mystified, moralized punitive labor, but rather the ontological mode of human existence. It is precisely the dialectics of labor that enables human society to transcend itself and continuously move toward an ideal picture of ever-greater perfection.

总之，在马克思那里，劳动不是抽象的思辨精神活动，也不是被神秘化、道德化的惩罚式劳动，而是人的本体存在方式，正是劳动的辩证法使人类社会超越自身，不断趋向臻于完善的理想图景。

3. The Correspondence between Human Liberation and Religious Salvation in Dialectical Schema Human liberation and religious salvation unfold according to the dialectical law of the negation of the negation, although the former belongs to the dialectics of labor, while the latter belongs to theological dialectics.

3．人类解放与宗教救赎在辩证图式上的相通性人类解放与宗教救赎是依照否定之否定辩证法则展开的，尽管前者属于劳动的辩证法，后者则是神学的辩证法。

The Old Testament’s Book of Genesis records that, in the beginning, human nature maintained a simple and innocent identity, like “an animal that is ignorant of itself and therefore in a state of innocence that does not distinguish good from evil” [8]8 Taylor, C. (1975). *Hegel*. Cambridge University Press. (p. 324). Since the forbidden fruit incident, human nature has “fallen and split” [19]19 The reference to “predestination or original sin” alludes to core doctrines of Protestant theology, particularly Calvinist predestination, which Weber linked to the spirit of capitalism. (p. 8). The forbidden fruit incident is the earliest “Enlightenment” in human history; it metaphorically signifies a crisis of faith in God and marks the awakening of human self-consciousness. Through self-consciousness, humanity discerns the difference between the finite and the infinite, between evil and good, perceives the original unity of the finite self with the infinite noumenon, and actively moves toward a spontaneous and self-conscious reconciliation with God. This is a bidirectional interactive process between humanity and God: “God strives to unite with humanity, and humanity strives to overcome its particularity in order to unite with God” [8]8 Taylor, C. (1975). *Hegel*. Cambridge University Press. (p. 324). Thus, the highest good is realized, and the split in human nature is healed. This is a dialectical schema of the negation of the negation—unity, split, and reunification of human nature—which contains the theological necessity of God’s creation. The theological dialectic of the opposition between evil and good is a mystical expression of the dialectic of being in the realm of faith; it provides Marx with an ultimate key to open the door from theological dialectics to historical dialectics. Marx replaces the theological dialectical schema of the self-fission of human nature with a subversion of the eternity and quasi-naturalness of the market exchange structure that conceals an ideological nature, extracting from the self-negating mechanism of economic operation the necessary law of the succession of old and new social formations.

《旧约·创世纪》中记载，起初，人性保持着质朴而天真的同一性，像“动物那样对自我茫然无知，并因此处于不辨善恶的天真状态之中”［8］(P324)。自禁果事件人性始“堕落和分裂”［19］(P8)。禁果事件是人类历史上最早的“启蒙运动”，它隐喻着对上帝的信仰危机，标识着人的自我意识觉醒。人通过自我意识辨识了有限与无限、恶与善之差异，洞察到有限自身与无限本体的原本统一性，主动趋向与神自在自为的和解，这是一个人与神双向的互动过程，“上帝竭力地与人统一，人竭力地克服他们的特殊性以便与上帝统一”［8］(P324)，于是，至善得到实现，人性的分裂得以弥合。这是一个人性统一——分裂——复合的否定之否定的辩证图式，内含着上帝创世的神学必然性。恶与善对角的神学辩证法是存在辩证法在信仰领域的神秘表达，它为马克思提供了一把打开从神学辩证法通向历史辩证法之门的终极钥匙。马克思把神学人性自我裂变的辩证图式，置换为对隐藏着意识形态性质的市场交换结构的永恒性和似自然性的颠覆，从经济运行的自否性机制中，抽取出新旧社会形态更替的必然法则。

Faced with the immense material agglomeration of exchange society, Marx transcends the ethical, abstract, and pitying salvific faith of religious scholars, stating that the disharmony, even antagonism and conflict, caused by the socialization of production under the capitalist organism and private ownership, and between the orderliness of social production and the irrationality of private production, “operates with iron necessity” [18]18 The phrase “imaginary flowers” and “illusory sun” are also from the same 1844 text, where Marx describes religion as a fantastic reflection of human suffering. (p. 8). This is the internal root of the self-negation of capitalist society. Using economic laws as a yardstick, Marx pronounces on history, foresees the future, inserts capitalist society into the organic sequence of human history, and is convinced that human society will pass through a stage from primitive public ownership to private ownership and then to a stage of the free kingdom based on individual ownership—a spiral development process achieved through dialectical negation. Marx’s pathological diagnosis of the organism of capitalist society and his depiction of the dialectical ascending roadmap of the negation of the negation in the evolution of social formations can be seen as “the messianic precursor of a new religion of the industrial age” [17]17 The term “opium of the people” is a well-known metaphor from Marx’s early work *A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right. Introduction* (1844). It is not a numbered slogan but a classical allusion within Marxist theory. (p. 386). In the ultimate sense, without the transcendent, ideal, and ultimate theological source, there would be no negative dialectics that subverts the existing order. As Fetscher points out: categories such as commodity fetishism and the negation of the negation “all originate from Marx’s own prehistory” [20]20 Max Weber’s *The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism* (1905) is a foundational sociological text arguing that Calvinist asceticism fostered modern capitalist rationality. (p. 56).

面对交换社会巨大的物质聚合体，马克思超越了宗教学家伦理的、抽象的、悲天悯人般的救世信念，言明资本机体生产的社会化与私人占有之间、社会生产的有序性与私人生产的非理性之间所造成的不协调甚至对抗和冲突，正在“以铁的必然性发生作用”［18］(P8)，它是资本社会自否性的内在根源。马克思以经济法则为标尺，断言历史，前瞻未来，把资本社会插进人类史的有机序列之中，确信人类社会经历一个从原始公有制到私有制再到以个人所有制为基础的自由王国阶段，这是一个经过辩证否定达到的螺旋式发展过程。马克思对资本主义社会机体的病理学的诊断，对社会形态演进的否定之否定辩证上升路线图的描绘，可以看作是“工业时代的新宗教的弥赛亚先驱”［17］(P386)。在终极形式上说，没有超验性、理想性、终极性之神学来源，就没有颠覆现存秩序的否定性辩证法，正如费彻尔指出:商品拜物教、否定之否定等范畴“它们都源于马克思自己的前史”［20］(P56)。

4. The affinity between human emancipation and theological redemption in their theoretical origins. Classical Christian eschatology represents the richness of the future direction of human history, and this characteristic constitutes the theological source of all theories of emancipation.

4．人类解放与神学救赎在理论源头上的亲缘性古典基督教末世论表征着人类历史未来走向的丰富性，这种特质构成一切解放理论的神学来源。

Horkheimer writes: “Religion should not be regarded as mere false consciousness, for it also helps preserve the hope for future justice” [12]12 Jay, M. (1984). *Marxism and Totality: The Adventures of a Concept from Lukács to Habermas*. University of California Press. (p. 68). Otherwise, it would be impossible to find a transcendent path that negates “what is” to reach “what is possible.”

霍克海默写道:“宗教不应被看作是单纯的虚假意识，因为它也有助于保存关于未来的正义的希望。”［12］(P68)否则，无法找到一条否定“既有之物”达及“可能之物”的超验通途。

Religion possesses dimensions of transcendence and negation; it maintains a non-identical critical tension with the existing order. As the declaration of a world of suffering, religion was originally the psychological expression of the oppressed’s unyieldingness, manifesting despair and protest against the existing moral concepts and social order of the earthly world. Through the promise of an otherworldly realm, it dilutes disappointment and suffering in the earthly world. In the stark contrast between heaven and earth, it reflects a transcendent pursuit of freedom, dignity, and happiness, forming an imaginary “opposition” to and “disintegration” of the earthly world—a silent force of negation.

宗教具有超越性和否定性之维度，它与现存之间保持着非同一性的批判张力。作为苦难世界的宣言，宗教最初是被压迫者不屈的心理表白，表现了对尘世间既有道德观念和社会秩序的绝望与抗议，它通过彼岸世界的许诺，稀释着对尘世的失望和苦难，在天国与尘世鲜明的映照关系中，折射出对自由、尊严和幸福的超然追寻，幻景式的构成对尘世“反对”和“瓦解”的想象力，是一种无声的否定性力量。

The revolutionary logic of religion weaves the cradle of human emancipation, nurturing a value orientation that transcends the existing order and crosses its boundaries. Horkheimer points out: “Religion records the hopes, desires, and accusations of generations” [21]21 Jean Baudrillard’s *The Mirror of Production* (1973) critiques Marxian political economy, arguing that the logic of production itself reproduces capitalist alienation. (p. 164). In the history of social transformation, people have demanded “the restoration of the original equality of primitive Christianity, demanding that this relationship be recognized as a norm among citizens. It drew conclusions about civic equality from the ‘equality of the children of God,’ and even partially drew conclusions about the equality of property. … And it was claimed as a necessary conclusion of primitive Christian doctrine” [22]22 The phrase “Christ is the mediator” draws on Marx’s early essay *On the Jewish Question* (1843), where he analyzes the relationship between political emancipation and religious alienation. (pp. 484–485). This standard of freedom and equality from the Bible became a direct basis for condemning and negating the unreasonable existing system. Since it was born from underdeveloped and immature social relations, it was an unrealizable utopia, but it nonetheless served as a path of redemption leading to the kingdom of heaven. The historical figure Thomas Müntzer was a social reformer; he wrote: “We, these worldly beings of flesh and blood, should become divine through Christ’s incarnation, and thus together with him become disciples of God, listen to God’s teachings, proclaim God’s spirit, thereby become holy, and completely transform into God, while earthly life should become heaven” [23]23 “Money is the jealous god of Israel” is a paraphrase from Marx’s *On the Jewish Question*, where he critiques the dominance of money in bourgeois society as a secular form of idolatry. (p. 221). Therefore, “modern socialism often traces its origins back to the age of the Anabaptists, which partly proves that the movement led by Thomas Müntzer should be seen as a step toward modern revolutionary movements” [23]23 “Money is the jealous god of Israel” is a paraphrase from Marx’s *On the Jewish Question*, where he critiques the dominance of money in bourgeois society as a secular form of idolatry. (p. 216). If this subversive tendency is brought down from heaven to earth, it becomes the political practice of modern Enlightenment. From More’s “utopian description of an ideal social system” [16]16 Thomas More (1478–1535), author of *Utopia*; Morelly (18th century) and Gabriel Bonnot de Mably (1709–1785) were French utopian communist thinkers; Saint-Simon (1760–1825), Charles Fourier (1772–1837), and Robert Owen (1771–1858) were early socialist theorists. (p. 357) to Morelly and Mably’s “directly communist theories” [16]16 Thomas More (1478–1535), author of *Utopia*; Morelly (18th century) and Gabriel Bonnot de Mably (1709–1785) were French utopian communist thinkers; Saint-Simon (1760–1825), Charles Fourier (1772–1837), and Robert Owen (1771–1858) were early socialist theorists. (p. 357), and then to Saint-Simon, Fourier, and Owen’s social reforms of an “illusory and utopian nature” [24]24 Adam Smith’s *The Wealth of Nations* (1776) is a classic text of classical political economy, cited here for its description of self-interest as the driving force of market exchange. (p. 566), these constitute the internal driving force for dismantling the old social order—a real movement attempting to replace the messianic kingdom with a political blueprint. Modern socialism, “in its theoretical form, initially appears as a further, seemingly more thorough development of the various principles put forward by the great French Enlightenment thinkers of the 18th century” [16]16 Thomas More (1478–1535), author of *Utopia*; Morelly (18th century) and Gabriel Bonnot de Mably (1709–1785) were French utopian communist thinkers; Saint-Simon (1760–1825), Charles Fourier (1772–1837), and Robert Owen (1771–1858) were early socialist theorists. (p. 355). Ignoring the “revolution” originating from the minds of clerics, the scientific form of socialist theory could not have been born.

宗教的革命性逻辑编织起人类解放的摇篮，孕育着超越现存秩序并越过其界限的价值指向。霍克海默指出:“宗教记录了世世代代的希望、欲望和控诉。”［21］(P164)在人类社会变革史上，人们曾要求“恢复原始基督教的平等关系，要求承认这种关系也是市民间的准则。它从‘上帝儿女的平等’得出有关市民平等的结论，甚至已经部分地得出有关财产平等的结论。……而且被说成是原始基督教教义的必然结论”［22］(P484－485)。这种来自《圣经》的自由平等准则，成为控诉与否定不合理现存制度的直接依据，由于它诞生于不发达、不成熟的社会关系，因而是无法实现的乌托邦，但是，它却不失为一条通向天国的救赎之路。历史上的闵采尔是社会变革者，他写道:“我们这些世俗的血肉之躯应当通过基督变为人而变为神，因此和他一起成为上帝的门徒，听从上帝教诲，宣讲上帝的精神，从而变得神圣，并完全转变为神，同时尘世的生活应当变为天堂。”［23］(P221)因此，“现代社会主义常常把其起源追溯至再浸礼教徒时代，这部分地证明了托马斯·闵采尔所领导的运动应被看作是朝现代革命运动方向迈出的一步。”［23］(P216)如果把这种颠覆性倾向从天上降至尘世，便是近代启蒙的政治实践。从莫尔关于“理想社会制度的空想的描写”［16］(P357)到摩莱里和马布利“直接共产主义的理论”［16］(P357)，再到圣西门、傅里叶和欧文具有“虚幻和空想的性质”的社会改革［24］(P566)，构成了瓦解旧的社会秩序的内在动力，是力图用政治蓝图取代弥赛亚天国的现实运动，而现代社会主义“就其理论形式来说，它起初表现为18世纪法国伟大的启蒙学者们所提出的各种原则的进一步的、似乎更彻底的发展”［16］(P355)。无视从僧侣头脑里缘起的“革命”，科学形态的社会主义理论便无从诞生。

Although human emancipation and theological redemption share a common origin in their theoretical genesis, there are significant differences in their modes of reflection. The logical concept of religious redemption belongs to the theological humanist paradigm of the dichotomy between “what ought to be” and “what is”—a transcendental model that “stands on its head.” Marx inverts the theological mode of thinking, taking “what is” as the coordinate, revealing the temporality and historicity of its existence from the self-split and contradictions of “what is,” and directly pointing to “what is possible.” This is a mode of thinking that “stands on its feet,” and its mode of reflection realizes the transformation of socialism from utopia to science.

尽管人类解放与神学救赎观在理论原发地上具有同源性，但是，两者在反思方式上却有着重大差别。宗教救赎观的逻辑理念属于“应有”与“现有”二分的神学人本主义范式，是一种“用头立地”的先验模式。马克思倒转宗教神学的思维方式，以“既有之物”为坐标，从“既有之物”的自我分裂与矛盾中，揭示其存在的暂时性和历史性，直指“可能之物”。这是“用脚立地”的思维模式，其反思方式实现了社会主义由空想到科学的转变。

In essence, there is a logical correlation between the theory of human emancipation and the concept of religious redemption that cannot be ignored. However, because Marx grounds the basis of salvation in the objective laws of the operation of the production system, he avoids the historical progress belief based on divine promises, replacing the temptation of otherworldly redemption with this-worldly social transformation, thereby endowing the critique of religion with a realistic logical force.

质言之，人类解放理论与宗教救赎观之间有着不容忽视的逻辑关联性，然而，由于马克思把救世之根据嫁接于生产体系运行的客观法则上，避免了神性承诺的历史进步信念，用此岸的社会变革置换彼岸救赎的诱惑，从而使宗教批判具有了现实的逻辑力量。

III. The Economic-Scientific Criterion of Marx’s Critique of Religion

三、马克思宗教批判的经济科学尺度

Marx focuses his critique of the ideological implications of religion and the exposure of its dependent noumenon on decoding the mysterious phenomenon of fetishism, demonstrating that the domination and manipulation of people by things in economic relations unfolds according to the same logical path as the worship of gods by people in the world of faith. This thus opens up the economic-scientific mechanism of the generation of religious consciousness, revealing the immense subversive and critical power of Marx’s method.

马克思把对宗教意识形态意蕴的批判和依生本体的揭露，聚焦于对拜物教神秘现象的解码，表明经济关系中物对人的支配与操控，同信仰世界人对神的膜拜按照同一逻辑进路展开，从而敞开了宗教意识生成的经济科学机制，表现了马克思批判方法巨大的颠覆性和批判力度。

1. Critique of the ideological implications of religion

1．对宗教意识形态意蕴之批判

Religion is the ideological illusion of the capitalist production system. Marx asserted: “Religion is the opium of the people.” [13]13 “The point is to change the world” — This is a paraphrase of Marx’s famous eleventh thesis on Feuerbach: “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.” (P2) Opium is a metaphorical expression of the nature of religious ideology, containing the two-dimensional functions of “consolation and justification.” [13]13 “The point is to change the world” — This is a paraphrase of Marx’s famous eleventh thesis on Feuerbach: “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.” (P1) Religion possesses a spiritual consoling function, sharing a similar analgesic effect with opium. Religion originates from a state of despair and helpless existence, serving as the ultimate resolution of the paradox of human existence in fantasy. By offering a distant hope for otherworldly happiness, it demarcates a poetic habitat corresponding to the secular world. In this sense, Marx compared religion to “imaginary flowers” and “the illusory sun.” [13]13 “The point is to change the world” — This is a paraphrase of Marx’s famous eleventh thesis on Feuerbach: “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.” (P2) Religion also has a justificatory function. The allure of otherworldly beauty causes people to overlook the evils under their noses, reducing the suffering and misfortune of the present world to absolute nothingness, thereby weakening the force of negation toward existing things. Therefore, religion is a tool for maintaining identity with the status quo; it “by appealing to predestination or original sin, by encouraging suffering to prepare us for rewards in the afterlife” [2]2 The “Copernican revolution” refers to Kant’s claim in the *Critique of Pure Reason* (1781) that objects must conform to our cognition, analogous to Copernicus’s shift from a geocentric to a heliocentric model. Hegel’s “God writing his autobiography” alludes to his view of history as the self-unfolding of the Absolute Spirit. Comte and Spencer represent 19th-century positivist and evolutionary theories of social progress. (P110) makes people indulge in religious fantasies, “preferring the long-lasting happiness of the afterlife to the fleeting happiness of this world.” [25] (P6) In Marx’s radical critical perspective, consolation is merely a deceptive magic; it obscures or conceals the lagging and conservative nature of religious consciousness, eroding the longing for the “possible” in its defense of the “already existing.” Anti-religion is precisely about opening up the decaying world that is spiritually consoled and guarded.

宗教是资本主义生产体系的意识形态幻象。马克思断定:“宗教是人民的鸦片。”［13］(P2)鸦片是宗教意识形态性质的隐喻表达，包含着“慰藉和辩护”［13］(P1)二维功能。宗教具有精神的慰藉功能，与鸦片同具相似的镇痛疗效。宗教源于绝望无奈的生存状态，是人类生存悖论在幻念中的终极解决，它通过对彼岸幸福的远景祈盼，圈定一片与世俗世界相对应的诗意般的栖息地，在此意义上，马克思把宗教比拟为“虚构的花朵”、“虚幻的太阳”［13］(P2)。宗教还具有辩护性功能。彼岸美景的诱惑使人们忽略鼻子底下的罪恶，把现世的痛苦和不幸虚化为绝对的无，从而消弱对现存事物的否定的力度，因此，宗教是维护与现存同一性的工具，它“通过求助于预定论或原罪说，通过鼓励受苦预备我们获得来世赏赐”［2］(P110)使人们沉迷于宗教幻景中，“宁愿要来世的、长久的幸福，而不要这个世界的昙花一现的幸福”［25］(P6)。在马克思激进的批判视野里，慰藉只是障眼的魔法，它遮蔽或掩藏着宗教意识的滞后性和保守性，在对“既有之物”的辩护中销蚀着对“可能之物”的向往，反宗教正是要敞开被精神慰藉着、守护着的朽败世界。

The social efficacy targeted by religious ideology is manifested in its ability to legitimize economic dominance and political control from the depths of the soul and from the metaphysical heights. Religious belief played an undeniable role in shaping the spiritual temperament of modern capitalism. Max Weber, standing on a value-neutral positivist standpoint, demonstrated the inseparable connection between Protestant ethics and the spirit of capitalism. He wrote: “The capitalist system very much requires a devotion to the calling of making money, an attitude toward material goods that is very well suited to the capitalist system.” [26] (P46) The Protestant Reformation adapted to secular needs, endowing the economic system and bureaucratic organization with ethical and sacred significance, regarding diligent labor and honest wealth accumulation as a divine calling. The rationalized, calculating principles of capitalist production and exchange are merely the secularization of the rational spirit of Christianity. The innovation of religious concepts cannot conceal the true nature of its ideology. Marx wrote: “Protestantism, by turning almost all the traditional holidays into workdays, played an important role in the genesis of capital.” [18]18 The phrase “imaginary flowers” and “illusory sun” are also from the same 1844 text, where Marx describes religion as a fantastic reflection of human suffering. (P317)

宗教意识形态注目的社会效能表现在，它从灵魂深处、从形而上之云端，证成经济支配力量与政治控制手段的合法性。宗教信念对近代资本主义精神气质的生成具有不可忽视的塑造作用，马克斯·韦伯站在价值中立的实证主义立场上，论证了新教伦理与资本主义的精神无法割舍的关联性，他写道:“资本主义制度非常需要对赚钱天职的献身，它是一种与资本主义制度非常相配的对物质财富的态度”［26］(P46)。新教改革适应了世俗的需要，给予经济体制和科层组织以伦理和神圣的价值意义，把勤奋劳动、诚实发财视为上帝赋予人的天职。合理化、算计的资本主义生产和交换原则，只不过是基督教理性精神的世俗化，宗教观念的推陈出新无法掩饰其意识形态的真实本性。马克思写道:“新教几乎把所有传统的假日都变成了工作日，由此它在资本的产生上就起了重要作用。”［18］(P317)

Baudrillard also perceived the deep enslavement caused by the Reformation, pointing out sharply: “The shift from asceticism to the mode of production, from morality to labor, from the purposiveness of wealth to the purposiveness of secularized needs, did not change the principle of separation and sublimation, repression and the exercise of violence.” [11]11 The phrase “logic of critique” refers to the critical dimension within the logic of production, as elaborated by Marx in his critique of political economy. (P48-49) In the process where political power and economic movement advance hand in hand, religion has always played a role in fueling the flames.

鲍德里亚也洞察到宗教改革所造成的深度奴役，他一针见血地指出:“从禁欲到生产方式、从道德到劳动、从财富的合目的性到世俗化的需要的合目的性转变，并没有改变分离和升华、压抑和运用暴力的原则。”［11］(P48－49)在政治权力与经济运动携手并进的行程中，宗教始终起着推波助澜的作用。

In essence, the ideological function of religion is merely the external form of its inner essence, whose ontology is rooted in civil society outside itself.

质言之，宗教的意识形态功能只不过是其内在本质外显形式，其本体生根于自身之外的市民社会之中。

2. An Interpretation of the Civil-Society Basis of Religious Consciousness

2．对宗教意识的市民社会基础之解读

Marx pointed out: “Religion itself is without content; its roots are not in heaven, but on earth.” [1]1 Engels, “On the Early History of Christianity” (1894-1895), in *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, vol. 27, p. 457. The quotation contrasts Christian otherworldly salvation with socialist this-worldly social transformation. (P528) Marx extended the exposure of religion’s dependent ontology to an analysis of the relationship between religion and civil society, even though this connection is often inverted, distorted, or sometimes disjointed. The mysterious, supersensible character of religion is generated through an intermediary. Marx analogized the relationship between humans and religion to a similar simulated relationship between the state and religion. He wrote: “Just as Christ is the mediator, onto whom man projects all his divinity, all his religious constraints, so the state is the mediator, onto which man projects all his non-divinity, all his human unconstraint.” [27] (P171) Both the mediator and the mirror are functionally similar entities; what is shown through the mirror of the intermediary is not the true ontology, but an image, a semblance. Image and semblance imply indirectness, narrowness, and illusoriness; they are the alienation of the true essence [11]11 The phrase “logic of critique” refers to the critical dimension within the logic of production, as elaborated by Marx in his critique of political economy. (P4), possessing no reality. Through the intermediary of Christ, man alienates his essence from himself, “objectifying his own hidden essence in religion” [28] (P60), sanctifying it, absolutizing it, and shaping a divine existence. The existence of the intermediary indicates that the divine being presents only a false, aesthetic, and mystified image of the otherworldly realm, obscuring the truth, and is a copy of the real ontology in alienated form.

马克思指出:“宗教本身是没有内容的，它的根源不是在天上，而是在人间”［1］(P528)。马克思把对宗教依生本体的揭露，延伸到对宗教与市民社会关系的解析上，尽管这种联系往往是倒置的、变形的、甚至有时是脱节的。宗教的神秘性、超感性特质是借助于中间介质生成的。马克思把人同宗教的关系喻示为国家同宗教的一种相似模拟关系。他写道:“正像基督是中介者，人把自己的全部神性、自己的全部宗教约束性都加在他身上一样，国家也是中介者，人把自己的全部非神性、自己的全部人的无约束性寄托在它身上。”［27］(P171)中介与镜子均是功能类似的存在物，通过介质的镜子显示的并非真实的本体，而是一种镜象、意象。镜象、意象意味着间接性、狭隘性和虚幻性，它是本真的异化［11］(P4)，不具有任何现实性。人借基督之中介，使其本质与自身相疏离，“在宗教中将他自己的隐秘的本质对象化”［28］(P60)、神圣化、绝对化，塑造了神性的存在。中介的存在表明，神性存在呈现的不过是彼岸世界虚假的、审美的和神秘化的形象，它遮蔽了真相，是以异化形式对真实本体的摹本。

The relationship between the state and religion unfolds along the same logic. In democratic states, by abolishing the state religion, the state rids itself of the narrowness and constraint of religion, “expelling religion from the sphere of public law into that of private law.” [27] (P174) However, people remain subject to religion. Since people project all their secularity, experience, and freedom through the intermediary of the state, all rights and freedoms, including religious equality, refracted through the prism of the state, are, relative to the real existence of civil society, an illusory spectrum—more precisely, a deformed form of enslavement and control.

国家同宗教的关系也是按照同样的理路展开。在民主国家，国家通过宣布废除国教，摆脱了宗教的狭隘性和拘束性，“把宗教从公法领域驱逐到私法领域中去”［27］(P174)，但是，人却依然受制于宗教。由于人是通过国家之中介寄托其全部世俗性、经验性和自由的，因此，透过国家之棱镜折射出的包括宗教平等在内的一切自由权利，相对于市民社会的真实存在而言，是一种虚幻的光谱图，确切地说，是一种变形了的奴役与控制。

The above predicament originates from the self-fragmentation and deep divergence of secular society. Along with the political emancipation of the bourgeoisie, the state became an abstract community erected above civil society. The secular split between the political state and civil society brought about the dualization of man: “Man leads a double life, not only in thought, in consciousness, but also in reality, in life—a heavenly life and an earthly life.” [27] (P172) The inverted dualistic split between the state and civil society corresponds to the inversion and paradox of the otherworldly and this-worldly realms: the metaphysical realm “flowing with milk and honey” resides in the distant, unreachable heaven, while the tangible earthly world is filled with sin and defect. The relationship between the state and civil society acquires the significance of a religious semblance; this is the secular basis of the illusory, upside-down religious worldview. On this, Marx pointed out: Members of the political state “are religious because they regard the state life, which lies beyond their actual individual existence, as their true life; they are religious because religion here is the spirit of civil society, the expression of the separation and estrangement of man from man.” [27] (P179)

上述困顿源于世俗社会的自我裂变与深度背离。伴随着资产阶级的政治解放，国家成为竖立于市民社会之上的抽象共同体。政治国家和市民社会的世俗分裂带来了人的二重化，“人不仅在思想中，在意识中，而且在现实中，在生活中，都过着双重的生活——天国的生活和尘世的生活”［27］(P172)。国家与市民社会倒立着的二元裂变关系，对应着彼岸世界和此岸世界倒置与悖谬:“流蜜”与“淌奶”的形而上之境停驻于遥不可及的天国，伸手可及的尘世却充满罪孽与缺陷。国家与市民社会之间的关系具有了宗教表象的意义，这便是虚幻的、头足倒置的宗教世界观的世俗基础。对此，马克思指出:政治国家的成员“信奉宗教是由于人把处于自己的现实个性彼岸的国家生活当做他的真实生活;他们信奉宗教是由于宗教在这里是市民社会的精神，是人与人分离和疏远的表现”［27］(P179)。

Marx deepened the exposure of the secular roots of religion into the sphere of production and exchange. Civil society, constituted by social relations, is a materialized world full of self-interest; it is precisely this that forms the basis of the state and the ontology of religion. Marx wrote: “Actual need, egoism, is the principle of civil society.” [27] (P194) In a materialized society, there exists a confrontational relationship of mutual isolation and mutual destruction among private individuals. On this, Adam Smith wrote: “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.” [29] (P14) Religion cannot be separated from its adhesion to egoism; the principle of civil society is precisely the spirit of religion. Marx wrote: “Money is the jealous god of Israel, before whom no other god may stand.” [27] (P194)

马克思把对宗教世俗根源的揭露，纵深到生产交换领域中。由社会关系聚合而成市民社会是一个充满利欲的物化世界，正是它构成了国家之基础、宗教之本体。马克思写道:“实际需要、利己主义是市民社会的原则。”［27］(P194)在物化社会里，私人之间存在着彼此隔绝、相互毁损的对峙关系，对此，亚当·斯密写道:“我们期望的晚餐并非来自屠夫、酿酒师和面包师的恩惠，而是来自他们对自身利益的关切”［29］(P14)。宗教无法剥离与利己主义的粘连，市民社会的原则恰好就是宗教的精神。马克思写道:“金钱是以色列人的妒忌之神;在他面前，一切神都要退位。”［27］(P194)

Thus, a series of inverted relationships—between private individual and citizen, civil society and political state, means and ends—are merely the empirical forms of the phantasm of this world and the other, the earthly and the heavenly. In short, Marx extended the ultimate explanation of religion’s dependent ontology from civil society to the logic of production. However, he was not satisfied with the vague generalities of production in general, but delved into the actual operation of commodity production and exchange, decoding the generative mechanism of religious consciousness through economic science.

可见，私人与公民、市民社会与政治国家、手段与目的等一系列关系头足倒立状，不过是此岸与彼岸、尘世与天国幻影的经验形式。总之，马克思把对宗教依生本体的终极解释从市民社会引申至生产之逻辑，但是，他不满足于一般生产或生产一般的空泛之论，而是纵深于现实商品生产与交换的运行过程中，对宗教意识的孕生机理进行了经济科学的解码。

3. The Decoding of Religious Consciousness through Economic Science

3．对宗教意识的经济科学之解码

Marx’s analysis of fetishism enables people to analyze various types of religious representations along the same path, providing a model for opening up the real noumenon hidden behind religious consciousness. Marx links the noumenon concealed by religion with the structure of commodity production and exchange, declaring that religious consciousness is not a “fabricated lie” deliberately woven by rulers or priests, nor is it people’s subjective illusion or misrecognition, but rather an illusion derived from a reified society, whose objective basis is the exchange society of material aggregates.

马克思对拜物教的分析，使得人们能够按照同一路径分析各种类型的宗教表象，为敞开宗教意识背后的真实本体提供了范本。马克思把宗教隐匿之本体与商品生产和交换之结构链接起来，申明宗教意识不是统治者或僧侣们有意“编织的谎言”，也不是人们的主观错觉或误认，而是由物化社会衍生的一种假象，其客观基础是物质聚合体的交换社会。

The organism of capitalist society is spontaneously generated in commercial activities by economic persons pursuing the maximization of their own interests. Adam Smith pointed out that in a commodity society, “every man lives by exchanging, or becomes in some measure a merchant, and the society itself grows to be what is properly a commercial society.” [29] (p. 19) However, the objective mechanism of daily exchange activities is alien and unknown to people; their fate is manipulated by a spontaneous, inexplicable heteronomy, and the “invisible hand” is an apt metaphor. The law of value operates like a physical law external to people, and the mode of human existence manifests as a quasi-natural operating mechanism. All this causes social domination and class control to take the illusory form of an impersonal force. People cannot escape the domination of the heteronomy of the reified world, and thus arises the idolatry of an unrecognizable, irresistible, and aggregated social force—this is the social soil in which fetishism takes root. This quasi-natural law deconstructs the direct relations of domination and servitude between “master and servant” in pre-capitalist societies, constituting a new ideological form of anonymous domination.

资本主义社会有机体是由追求自身利益最大化的经济人在商业活动中自发生成的。亚当·斯密指出:在商品社会中，“每一个人都靠交换来生活，在某种程度上变成了一个商人，而社会本身也逐渐成为一个完完全全的商业社会”［29］(P19)。但是，每日每次进行交换活动的客观机制对人们来说是异己而未知的，其命运被自发的、莫名的他律所操纵，“看不见的手”就是绝妙的隐喻。价值规律犹如外在于人的物理法则般发生作用，人的存在方式表现为似自然的运行机制，这一切使得社会统治、阶级控制采取了无人身的幻象形式，人们无法摆脱物化世界他律的支配，于是便产生了对无法辨识的、无法抗拒的、聚合而成的社会力量的偶像崇拜，这就是拜物教根生的社会土壤。这种似自然法则解构了前资本主义社会“主仆”之间的直接统治与奴役关系，构成了匿名统治的意识形态新形式。

Marx’s concept of fetishism is precisely meant to unveil the mirror image of reified ideology. Unlike national economists, who focus only on the use value of objects that bear social wealth, Marx writes: “The analysis of commodities shows that it is a very strange thing, abounding in metaphysical subtleties and theological niceties.” [18]18 The phrase “imaginary flowers” and “illusory sun” are also from the same 1844 text, where Marx describes religion as a fantastic reflection of human suffering. (p. 88) It is not the material form of the commodity, but precisely the form of the commodity that is the most dangerous force; it is this that produces its enchanting charm. For this reason, what needs to be opened up is the mystery of the commodity form itself. Marx writes: “It is nothing but the definite social relation between men themselves which assumes here, for them, the fantastic form of a relation between things.” [18]18 The phrase “imaginary flowers” and “illusory sun” are also from the same 1844 text, where Marx describes religion as a fantastic reflection of human suffering. (p. 90)

马克思拜物教概念就是要揭开物化意识形态之镜象。与国民经济学家只关注承载社会财富的物的使用价值不同，马克思写道:“对商品的分析表明，它却是一种很古怪的东西，充满形而上学的微妙和神学的怪诞。［18］(P88)不是商品的物质形体，恰恰是商品的形式是最具危险力的力量，正是它产生了迷人的魅力，为此需要敞开的是商品形式本身的奥秘。马克思写道:“人们自己的一定的社会关系，但它在人们面前采取了物与物的关系的虚幻形式。”［18］(P90)

In Marx’s view, the relationship in which people exchange their labor and the products of their labor is concealed by the exchange of things for things mediated by money. This concealment creates a confusion and misrecognition of the qualitative distinction between economic laws and natural laws; the law of exchange acquires a self-sufficiency and self-existence, as if it were a natural necessity, “impersonal.” The quasi-natural attribute of the mechanism by which historical laws operate gives domination an unquestionable, naturally reasonable universal significance, constituting an ideological defense of the eternity and rationality of the existing order of domination. “The old economists misunderstood the nature of economic laws, comparing them with the laws of physics and chemistry” [18]18 The phrase “imaginary flowers” and “illusory sun” are also from the same 1844 text, where Marx describes religion as a fantastic reflection of human suffering. (p. 21); various “fetishistic” economic theories based on value postulates originate from this. On the surface, commodity production and exchange activities grant people unprecedented independence and autonomy; people’s social connections take the form of equal and voluntary contracts. On this, Žižek writes: “With the establishment of bourgeois society, the relations of domination and servitude are repressed: we formally begin to concern ourselves obviously with free subjects, whose interpersonal relations have been rid of all fetishistic forms” [30] (p. 36). However, through the illusion of reified society, what truly exists is a deep relationship of exploitation and control. The fact that labor power is sold as a special commodity on the commodity exchange market and that others’ surplus labor is appropriated without compensation creates a huge inequality and imbalance between rights and obligations in economic relations. This original injustice reveals the falsity of the principle of free and fair exchange, pushing the concealed truth to the forefront, and leading to the collapse of the capital organism and the entire ideological system that legitimizes it. Restoring the truth of the concealed logic of domination is the methodological essence of Marx’s critique of fetishism.

在马克思看来，人们相互交换其劳动和劳动产品的关系，被以货币为中介所进行的物与物的交换关系所掩盖，这种掩盖造成了对经济规律与自然法则之间质性区分的混淆和误认，交换规律则获得了如同自然必然性般“无人身”的自足性与自在性。历史规律作用机制的似自然属性，使统治具有了不言而喻、天然合理的普遍意义，造成了对现有统治秩序永恒性和合理性的意识形态辩护。“旧经济学家不懂得经济规律的性质，他们把经济规律同物理学定律和化学定律相比拟”［18］(P21)，各种价值悬设的“拜物教”式的经济学理论来源于此。从表象看，商品生产与交换活动使人们获得了前所未有的独立性和自主性，人们的社会联系采取了平等自愿的契约形式，对此，齐泽克写道:“随着资产阶级社会的确立，统治和奴役的关系被压抑了:我们开始正式地明显关心起自由的主体，他们之间的人际关系已经摆脱一切拜物教形式”［30］(P36)。但是，透过物化社会之幻象，真实存在的是深度的剥削与控制关系。商品交换市场上作为特殊商品出卖的劳动力以及无偿地占有他人剩余劳动之事实，造成了经济关系中权利与义务的巨大的不对等、不平衡，这种始源上的不公正，表明自由公正交易原则的虚妄性，把被遮蔽的真相推到了前台，导致了资本机体乃至对其进行合法性辩护的整个意识形态体系的崩塌。把遮蔽着的统治逻辑真相还原，是马克思拜物教批判之方法论真髓。

Marx’s method of deciphering fetishism decodes the enslavement of nature and humanity by various ghostly illusions in the reified sphere. Religion exists in that social form where the relations of things dominate people while people do not yet dominate the relations of things; it is the awe and worship of an alien social force aggregated by compulsory division of labor, and in essence, it is a faint echo in the reified world of the distorted voice of obscure social relations. In a certain sense, capitalist commodity society can be seen as the secular manifestation of the religious world. Marx points out: “This fetishism of the world of commodities, as the foregoing analysis has demonstrated, arises from the peculiar social character of the labor that produces commodities.” [18]18 The phrase “imaginary flowers” and “illusory sun” are also from the same 1844 text, where Marx describes religion as a fantastic reflection of human suffering. (p. 90) The reified external form of social relations in commodity exchange easily gives rise to religious illusions. On this, Marx analogizes: “For a society of commodity producers, Christianity, with its cult of abstract man, more especially in its bourgeois developments, Protestantism, Deism, etc., is the most fitting form of religion.” [18]18 The phrase “imaginary flowers” and “illusory sun” are also from the same 1844 text, where Marx describes religion as a fantastic reflection of human suffering. (p. 97) Narrow, alien, reified social relations are always the hidden background of religion. “The religious reflection of the real world can disappear only when the practical relations of everyday life offer to man none but perfectly intelligible and reasonable relations with regard to his fellowmen and to nature.” [18]18 The phrase “imaginary flowers” and “illusory sun” are also from the same 1844 text, where Marx describes religion as a fantastic reflection of human suffering. (p. 97)

马克思对拜物教的破解方法，解码了物化领域中诸种幽灵鬼怪般的幻象对自然和人的奴役。宗教存在于物的关系支配人而人还没有支配物的关系的那种社会形态，是对由强制分工聚合而来的异己的社会力量的敬畏与崇拜，本质上是晦暗的社会关系之变声在物化世界中的微弱回响。在某种意义上说，资本主义商品社会可以看作是宗教世界的世俗表现形式，马克思指出:“商品世界的这种拜物教性质，像以上分析已经表明的，是来源于生产商品的劳动所特有的社会性质。”［18］(P90)商品交换中社会关系所具有的物化的外在形式，容易使人产生宗教的幻境，对此，马克思比喻道:“对于这种社会来说，崇拜抽象人的基督教，特别是资产阶级发展阶段的基督教，如新教、自然神教等等，是最适当的宗教形式。”［18］(P97)狭隘的、异己的、物化的社会关系始终是宗教隐蔽的背景，“只有当实际日常生活的关系，在人们面前表现为人与人之间和人与自然之间极明白而合理的关系的时候，现实世界的宗教反映才会消失”［18］(P97)。

In sum, the formation mechanism of the dual dimensions of Marx’s critique of religion shows that in the history of human thought, the struggles and conflicts among various systems of thought are by no means a battlefield of life and death; different systems of thought, through convergence, collision, acceptance, and absorption, jointly flow into the long river of human intellectual history, and Marx’s historical theory is no exception. The immortal value of Marx’s critique of religion lies in this: he replaced the Christian history of salvation with the history of liberation through labor, thereby, in the situation where the evangelical spirit of religion has retreated, bestowing upon the world the real force of freedom and liberation.

总之，马克思宗教批判的双重维度的形成机理表明，在人类思想史上，各种思想体系之间的博弈与纷争，决非你死我活的决斗场，不同思想体系在交汇、冲撞、接纳、吸收中共同汇入人类认识史长河，马克思的历史理论概莫能外。马克思宗教批判不朽的价值在于:他用劳动解放史置换了基督教救赎史，从而能够在宗教福音精神隐退的情形下，把自由与解放的现实力量给予了世界。

References

参考文献

[1]1 Engels, “On the Early History of Christianity” (1894-1895), in *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, vol. 27, p. 457. The quotation contrasts Christian otherworldly salvation with socialist this-worldly social transformation. Selected Works of Marx and Engels: Vol. 4 [M]. Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 1995.

［1］马克思恩格斯选集:第4卷［M］．北京:人民出版社，1995．

[2]2 The “Copernican revolution” refers to Kant’s claim in the *Critique of Pure Reason* (1781) that objects must conform to our cognition, analogous to Copernicus’s shift from a geocentric to a heliocentric model. Hegel’s “God writing his autobiography” alludes to his view of history as the self-unfolding of the Absolute Spirit. Comte and Spencer represent 19th-century positivist and evolutionary theories of social progress. [US] Wilkens, Padgett. Christianity and Western Thought: Vol. 2 [M]. Trans. Liu Ping. Beijing: Peking University Press, 2005.

［2］［美］威尔肯斯·帕杰特．基督教与西方思想:卷二［M］．刘平．北京:北京大学出版社，2005．

[3]3 The reference is to the cyclical view of history in ancient Greek thought, as opposed to the linear, progressive view introduced by Christianity. [Italy] Benedetto Croce. Theory and History of Historiography [M]. Trans. Fu Rengan. Beijing: Commercial Press, 1982.

［3］［意］贝奈戴托·克罗齐．历史学的理论和实际［M］．傅任敢．北京:商务印书馆，1982．

[4]4 W. Thompson is likely William Irwin Thompson (1938-2020), an American social philosopher and cultural historian, though the specific work is not identified here. The claim is that Christianity introduced a self-conscious historical perspective. [US] J. W. Thompson. A History of Historical Writing: Vol. 1 [M]. Trans. Sun Bingying. Beijing: Commercial Press, 1988.

［4］［美］J·w·汤普森．历史著作史:上册［M］．孙秉莹．北京:商务印书馆，1988．

[5]5 Rousseau, *The Social Contract* (1762), Book I, Chapter 1. The quotation expresses the paradox of natural freedom and social bondage, a key theme of Enlightenment critique. [France] Rousseau. The Social Contract [M]. Trans. He Zhaowu. Beijing: Commercial Press, 1980.

［5］［法］卢梭．社会契约论［M］．何兆武．北京:商务印书馆，1980．

[6]6 This describes Kant’s shift from traditional revealed religion to a religion within the limits of reason alone, as developed in his *Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason* (1793). [US] Colin Brown. Christianity and Western Thought: Vol. 1 [M]. Trans. Zha Changping. Beijing: Peking University Press, 2005.

［6］［美］科林·布朗．基督教与西方思想:卷一［M］．查常平．北京:北京大学出版社，2005．

[7]7 Hegel, G. W. F. (1982). *Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Religion* [Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion], Vol. 1. Chinese edition: Commercial Press. [Germany] Hegel. Hegel’s Early Theological Writings [M]. Trans. He Lin. Beijing: Commercial Press, 1988.

［7］［德］黑格尔．黑格尔早期神学著作［M］．贺麟．北京:商务印书馆，1988年版．

[8]8 Taylor, C. (1975). *Hegel*. Cambridge University Press. [Canada] Charles Taylor. Hegel [M]. Trans. Zhang Guoqing. Nanjing: Yilin Press, 2002.

［8］［加拿大］查尔斯·泰勒．黑格尔［M］．张国清．南京:译林出版社，2002．

[9]9 Feuerbach, L. (1984). *Das Wesen des Christentums* [The Essence of Christianity]. Chinese edition: Commercial Press. Department of Foreign Philosophy, Faculty of Philosophy, Peking University. Selected Readings in Western Philosophy: Vol. 2 [M]. Beijing: Commercial Press, 1982.

［9］北京大学哲学系外国哲学史教研室．西方哲学原著选读:下册［M］．北京:商务印书馆，1982．

[10]10 Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1995). *Marx-Engels Werke* [Marx-Engels Collected Works], Vol. 1. Chinese edition: People’s Publishing House. Complete Works of Marx and Engels: Vol. 1 [M]. Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 1995.

［10］马克思恩格斯全集:第1卷［M］．北京:人民出版社，1995．

[11]11 The phrase “logic of critique” refers to the critical dimension within the logic of production, as elaborated by Marx in his critique of political economy. [France] Baudrillard. The Mirror of Production [M]. Trans. Yang Haifeng. Beijing: Central Compilation and Translation Press, 2005.

［11］［法］鲍德里亚．生产之境［M］．仰海峰．北京:中央编译出版社，2005．

[12]12 Jay, M. (1984). *Marxism and Totality: The Adventures of a Concept from Lukács to Habermas*. University of California Press. [US] Martin Jay. The Dialectical Imagination: A History of the Frankfurt School [M]. Trans. Shan Shilian. Guangzhou: Guangdong People’s Publishing House, 1996.

［12］［美］马丁·杰伊．法兰克福学派史［M］．单世联．广州:广东人民出版社，1996．

[13]13 “The point is to change the world” — This is a paraphrase of Marx’s famous eleventh thesis on Feuerbach: “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.” Selected Works of Marx and Engels: Vol. 1 [M]. Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 1995.

［13］马克思恩格斯选集:第1卷［M］．北京:人民出版社，1995．

[14]14 Thomas Müntzer (c. 1489–1525) was a German radical theologian and early Reformation figure who led a peasant uprising against feudal and ecclesiastical authority. Department of Foreign Philosophy, Faculty of Philosophy, Peking University. Selected Readings in Western Philosophy: Vol. 1 [M]. Beijing: Commercial Press, 1981.

［14］北京大学哲学系外国哲学史研究室．西方哲学原著选读:上册［M］．北京:商务印书馆，1981．

[15]15 The Anabaptists were a radical wing of the Protestant Reformation that advocated adult baptism and social equality, often persecuted by both Catholic and mainstream Protestant authorities. [UK] McGrath. *Christianity: An Introduction* [M]. Sun Yi. Beijing: Peking University Press, 2003.

［15］［英］麦格拉斯．基督教概论［M］．孙毅．北京:北京大学出版社，2003．

[16]16 Thomas More (1478–1535), author of *Utopia*; Morelly (18th century) and Gabriel Bonnot de Mably (1709–1785) were French utopian communist thinkers; Saint-Simon (1760–1825), Charles Fourier (1772–1837), and Robert Owen (1771–1858) were early socialist theorists. *Selected Works of Marx and Engels: Volume 3* [M]. Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 1995.

［16］马克思恩格斯选集:第3卷［M］．北京:人民出版社，1995．

[17]17 The term “opium of the people” is a well-known metaphor from Marx’s early work *A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right. Introduction* (1844). It is not a numbered slogan but a classical allusion within Marxist theory. James C. Livingston. *Modern Christian Thought: Volume 1* [M]. He Guanghu. Chengdu: Sichuan People’s Publishing House, 1999.

［17］詹姆斯·C．利文斯顿．现代基督教思想:上册［M］．何光沪．成都:四川人民出版社，1999．

[18]18 The phrase “imaginary flowers” and “illusory sun” are also from the same 1844 text, where Marx describes religion as a fantastic reflection of human suffering. *Complete Works of Marx and Engels: Volume 44* [M]. Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 2001.

［18］马克思恩格斯全集:第44卷［M］．北京:人民出版社，2001．

[19]19 The reference to “predestination or original sin” alludes to core doctrines of Protestant theology, particularly Calvinist predestination, which Weber linked to the spirit of capitalism. [Germany] Hegel. *Philosophy of Religion: Volume 1* [M]. Wei Qingzheng. Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, 2005.

［19］［德］黑格尔．宗教哲学:上册［M］．魏庆征．北京:中国社会出版社，2005．

[20]20 Max Weber’s *The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism* (1905) is a foundational sociological text arguing that Calvinist asceticism fostered modern capitalist rationality. [Germany] Fetscher. *Marx and Marxism: From Economic Critique to Worldview* [M]. Zhao Yulan. Beijing: Beijing Normal University Publishing Group, 2009.

［20］［德］费彻尔．马克思与马克思主义:从经济学批判到世界观［M］．赵玉兰．北京:北京师范大学出版集团，2009．

[21]21 Jean Baudrillard’s *The Mirror of Production* (1973) critiques Marxian political economy, arguing that the logic of production itself reproduces capitalist alienation. Cao Weidong. *Horkheimer Collection* [M]. Qu Dong. Shanghai: Shanghai Far East Publishers, 1997.

［21］曹卫东．霍克海默集［M］．渠东．上海:上海远东出版社，1997．

[22]22 The phrase “Christ is the mediator” draws on Marx’s early essay *On the Jewish Question* (1843), where he analyzes the relationship between political emancipation and religious alienation. *Complete Works of Marx and Engels: Volume 10* [M]. Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 1998.

［22］马克思恩格斯全集:第10卷［M］．北京:人民出版社，1998．

[23]23 “Money is the jealous god of Israel” is a paraphrase from Marx’s *On the Jewish Question*, where he critiques the dominance of money in bourgeois society as a secular form of idolatry. [Germany] Karl Mannheim. *Ideology and Utopia* [M]. Li Ming. Beijing: The Commercial Press, 2000.

［23］［德］卡尔·曼海姆．意识形态和乌托邦［M］．黎鸣．北京:商务印书馆，2000．

[24]24 Adam Smith’s *The Wealth of Nations* (1776) is a classic text of classical political economy, cited here for its description of self-interest as the driving force of market exchange. *Complete Works of Marx and Engels: Volume 18* [M]. Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 1964.

［24］马克思恩格斯全集:第18卷［M］．北京:人民出版社，1964．

[25] [France] Paul-Henri Thiry d’Holbach. *Pocket Theology* [M]. Shan Zhicheng. Beijing: The Commercial Press, 1972.

［25］［法］保尔·霍尔巴赫．袖珍神学［M］．单志澄．北京:商务印书馆，1972．

[26] [Germany] Max Weber. *The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism* [M]. Huang Xiaojing. Xi’an: Shaanxi Normal University Press, 2002.

［26］［德］马克斯·韦伯．新教伦理与资本主义精神［M］．黄晓京．西安:陕西师范大学出版社，2002．

[27] *Complete Works of Marx and Engels: Volume 3* [M]. Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 2002.

［27］马克思恩格斯全集:第3卷［M］．北京:人民出版社，2002．

[28] *Selected Works of Feuerbach: Volume 2* [M]. Rong Zhenhua. Beijing: The Commercial Press, 1984.

［28］费尔巴哈著作选:下册［M］．荣震华．北京:商务印书馆，1984．

[29] [UK] Adam Smith. *The Wealth of Nations* [M]. Tang Risong. Beijing: Huaxia Publishing House, 2005.

［29］［英］亚当·斯密．国富论［M］．唐日宋．北京:华夏出版社，2005．

[30] [Slovenia] Slavoj Žižek. *The Sublime Object of Ideology* [M]. Fang Jie. Beijing: Central Compilation and Translation Press, 2002.

［30］［斯］斯垃沃热·齐泽克．意识形态的崇高对象［M］．方杰．北京:中央编译出版社，2002．

Online editor: Jia Fei

网络编辑：嘉扉