Marxist Research Should Treat Religious Studies as a Discipline Equally Important as Philosophy

Marxist philosophy, political economy, and scientific socialism constitute the three component parts of Marxism. The direct source of Marxist philosophy is classical German philosophy. Classical German philosophy can, in turn, be said to have been the religious studies of Germany at that time. These philosophical systems were almost all established in the process of studying and criticizing religion. Therefore, Marxist philosophy, established on the basis of criticizing classical German philosophy, is also Marxist religious studies. The famous philosophical judgments of Marx and Engels that are widely recited today are also almost all famous judgments on religious issues. Hence, only by deeply studying religious issues and deeply studying Marxist religious studies can we deeply understand those famous philosophical propositions of Marx and Engels. Therefore, in studying Marxism, Marxist religious studies should be placed in a position equally important as Marxist philosophy.

马克思主义哲学、政治经济学和科学社会主义构成了马克思主义的三个组成部分。马克思主义哲学的直接来源，就是德国古典哲学。德国古典哲学，又可以说，就是德国当时的宗教学。这些哲学体系，几乎都是在研究和批判宗教的过程中建立起来的。因此，在批判德国古典哲学基础上建立起来的马克思主义哲学，也就是马克思主义的宗教学。如今广泛传颂的马克思、恩格斯著名的哲学论断，也几乎都是对宗教问题的著名论断。因此，只有深入研究宗教问题，深入研究马克思主义的宗教学，也才能深入理解马克思、恩格斯那些著名的哲学命题。所以，研究马克思主义，应把马克思主义宗教学放在和马克思主义哲学同等重要的地位。

I. The Object of Critique of Classical German Philosophy

一 、 德国古典哲学的批判对象

The first sentence of the first article in the first volume of the 2012 latest edition of the *Selected Works of Marx and Engels* is: “As far as Germany is concerned, the criticism of religion is essentially completed; and the criticism of religion is the premise of all other criticism.” [1]1 Karl Marx, “Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right: Introduction,” in *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, vol. 3 (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1975), p. 175. Those who completed the criticism of religion were the classical German philosophers. Among these philosophers were not only David Strauss of the Young Hegelians, who wrote *The Life of Jesus*, and Bruno Bauer, who deeply studied the Christian Gospels, but also Ludwig Feuerbach, who wrote *The Essence of Christianity*. *The Essence of Christianity* is Feuerbach’s representative materialist work and also Feuerbach’s most important contribution to religious studies.

《马克思恩格斯选集》2012年最新版第一卷第一篇第一句话是，“就德国来说，对宗教的批判基本上已经结束；而对宗教的批判，是其他一切批判的前提。”完成对宗教批判的，就是德国古典哲学家们。这些哲学家中，不仅有青年黑格尔派中撰写《耶稣传》的大卫·施特劳斯、深入研究基督教福音书的布鲁诺·鲍威尔，更有撰写了《基督教的本质》的LUDE维希·费尔巴哈。《基督教的本质》是费尔巴哈唯物主义的代表作，也是费尔巴哈对宗教学最重要的贡献。

Tracing back to their predecessors Hegel and Kant. Kant not only used his critical transcendental philosophy to clarify that there is no possibility of the existence of God in either human a priori reason or a posteriori experience, but also centrally criticized all the various proofs of the existence of God that had preceded him, deeming these proofs invalid. Hegel, with his dialectical thinking possessing a “tremendous sense of history,” [2]2 Friedrich Engels, *Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy*, in *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, vol. 26 (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1990), p. 361. fostered a group of thinkers who “could belong to the most extreme opposition in both politics and religion.” [3]3 Engels, *Ludwig Feuerbach*, p. 361. Moreover, Hegel also provided a philosophical summation of the words and deeds that had exposed the dark rule of the Christian church since the eighteenth century. He pointed out that the corruption of the church lay in the fact that the clergy themselves were “a secular existence, possessing property, treasures” and other “coarse, sensual, worldly things.” [4]4 G.W.F. Hegel, *Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion*, vol. 3, ed. Peter C. Hodgson (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985), p. 155.

上溯到他们的前辈黑格尔、康德。康德不仅以他批判的先验哲学阐明，无论在人类的先天理性还是后天经验中，都没有上帝（God）存在的可能，而且还集中批判了在他以前关于上帝存在的种种证明，认为这些证明都是无效的。黑格尔则以自己具有“巨大的历史感”的辩证思维，成就了一批“在政治上和宗教上都可能属于最极端的反对派”的思想家。不仅如此，黑格尔还对十八世纪以来揭露基督教会黑暗统治的言行进行了哲学总结。指出教会的腐败，其原因在于那些教士本身乃是“世俗的定在，具有财产、宝物”等“粗糙的情欲的世俗的东西。”

When describing the state of classical German philosophy, Engels stated that in nineteenth-century Germany, just as in eighteenth-century France, the philosophical revolution also served as the prelude to political change. The difference was that the philosophical revolution in France waged an open struggle against the entire official science, against the church, and often also against the state. But German philosophy was, to a certain extent, already elevated to the status of the state philosophy of the Kingdom of Prussia. The philosophers were almost all professors, tutors of youth appointed by the state. However, the “dialectical philosophy” represented by Hegel “overturned all notions of final absolute truth and of the corresponding absolute human state.” [5]5 Engels, *Ludwig Feuerbach*, p. 360. “In its face, nothing final, nothing absolute, nothing sacred exists.” [6]6 Engels, *Ludwig Feuerbach*, p. 360. And the opposition in politics and religion fostered by this philosophy, because “politics was at that time a thorny field,” [7]7 Engels, *Ludwig Feuerbach*, p. 362. primarily “turned into a struggle against religion.” [8]8 Engels, *Ludwig Feuerbach*, p. 362. Beginning with Strauss, passing through Bauer and Stirner, they all profoundly exposed and criticized traditional religion. And because “the practical need for the struggle against existing religion drove the most resolute Young Hegelians back to English and French materialism.” [9]9 Engels, *Ludwig Feuerbach*, p. 363. Until the publication of Feuerbach’s *The Essence of Christianity*, it finally “straightforwardly restored materialism to the throne.” [10]10 Engels, *Ludwig Feuerbach*, p. 364.

恩格斯描述德国古典哲学的状况时说道，在19世纪的德国，正像18世纪的法国一样，哲学革命也做了政治变革的前导。不同的是，法国的哲学革命，同整个官方科学，同教会，也常常同国家进行公开的斗争。但是德国哲学，却是某种程度上已经被推崇为普鲁士王国的国家哲学。哲学家们几乎都是教授，是由国家任命的青年的导师。但是，以黑格尔为代表的“辩证哲学”却“推翻了一切关于最终的绝对真理和与之相应的绝对的人类状态的观念。”“在它面前，不存在任何最终的东西、绝对的东西、神圣的东西。”而由这种哲学所成就的政治上和宗教上的反对派，由于“政治在当时是一个荆棘丛生的领域”，所以这些反对派主要的“就转为反宗教的斗争”。由施特劳斯开始，经过鲍威尔、施蒂纳，都对传统宗教进行了深刻的揭露和批判。并且由于“对现存宗教进行斗争的实践需要，把大批最坚决的青年黑格尔分子推回到英国和法国的唯物主义。”直到费尔巴哈《基督教的本质》出版，终于“直截了当地使唯物主义重新登上王座”。

Up to this point, classical German philosophy had also completed its task as the precursor of political change, to the extent that Marx, as early as 1843 in his *Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right: Introduction*, declared at the very outset: “As far as Germany is concerned, the criticism of religion is essentially completed.” [11]11 Marx, “Contribution to the Critique,” p. 175. And he pointed out that “the criticism of religion is the premise of all other criticism.” [12]12 Marx, “Contribution to the Critique,” p. 175. It is in this same work that Marx put forward a series of classic judgments on religious issues that are still regarded as aphorisms today:

至此为止，德国古典哲学也完成了自己作为政治变革先导的任务，以致马克思早在1843年撰写的《〈黑格尔法哲学批判〉导言》一上来就明确宣布,“就德国来说，对宗教的批判基本上已经结束。”并且指出，“对宗教的批判是其他一切批判的前提。”也就是在这篇著作中，马克思提出了一系列迄今为止仍然被视为格言的、关于宗教问题的经典论断：

“The basis of irreligious criticism is: man makes religion, religion does not make man.” [13]13 Marx, “Contribution to the Critique,” p. 175.

“反宗教的批判的根据是：人创造了宗教，而不是宗教创造人。”

“Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritualistic *point d’honneur*, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, its universal ground for consolation and justification.” [14]14 Marx, “Contribution to the Critique,” p. 175.

“宗教是这个世界的总理论，是它的包罗万象的纲要，它的具有通俗形式的逻辑，它的唯灵论的荣誉问题［Pointd honneur］，它的狂热，它的道德约束，它的庄严补充，它借以求得慰藉和辩护的总根据。”

“Religious suffering is at the same time the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.” [15]15 Marx, “Contribution to the Critique,” p. 175.

“宗教里的苦难既是现实的苦难的表现，又是对这种现实的苦难的抗议。宗教是被压迫生灵的叹息，是无情世界的情感，正像它是无精神活力的制度的精神一样。宗教是人民的鸦片。”

“The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness.” [16]16 Marx, “Contribution to the Critique,” p. 176.

“废除作为人民的虚幻幸福的宗教，就是要求人民的现实幸福。”

Marx’s classic judgments on religious issues are the theoretical foundation of Marxist religious studies and also the excellent achievements of the criticism of religion by classical German philosophy at that time. On this basis, Marx also put forward a series of classic judgments on philosophical issues that remain current today:

马克思关于宗教问题的经典论断，是马克思主义宗教学的理论基础，也是当时德国古典哲学对宗教批判的优秀成果。在这个基础上，马克思又提出了一系列迄今为止关于哲学问题的经典论断：

“The weapon of criticism cannot, of course, replace criticism by weapons, material force must be overthrown by material force; but theory also becomes a material force as soon as it has gripped the masses. Theory is capable of gripping the masses as soon as it demonstrates *ad hominem*, and it demonstrates *ad hominem* as soon as it becomes radical. To be radical is to grasp things by the root.” [17]17 Marx, “Contribution to the Critique,” p. 182.

“批判的武器当然不能代替武器的批判，物质力量只能用物质力量来摧毁；但是理论一经掌握群众，也会变成物质力量。理论只要说服人［ad hominem］，就能掌握群众；而理论只要彻底，就能说服人［ad hominem］。所谓彻底，就是抓住事物的根本。”

“The degree to which a theory is realized in a country depends on the degree to which it fulfills the needs of that country.” [18]18 Marx, “Contribution to the Critique,” p. 182.

“理论在一个国家实现的程度，总是取决于理论满足这个国家的需要的程度。”

“Philosophy finds its material weapons in the proletariat, just as the proletariat finds its spiritual weapons in philosophy.” [19]19 Marx, “Contribution to the Critique,” p. 187.

“哲学把无产阶级当做自己的物质武器，同样，无产阶级也把哲学当做自己的精神武器。”

Therefore, to deeply understand Marxist philosophy, one must deeply understand Marxist religious studies, and understand Marx and Engels’ research on and criticism of religion.

因此，要深入理解马克思主义的哲学，就必须深入理解马克思主义的宗教学，理解马克思恩格斯对宗教的研究和批判。

In the theoretical struggle of religious research and religious criticism, although classical German philosophy was more profound than French philosophy, what it lacked compared to French philosophy was that classical German philosophy and the philosophers who created these brilliant philosophies almost all dragged a religious tail. Kant believed that even if there is no God, for the sake of morality, a God must be created. Hegel, although he constructed an essentially revolutionary system of dialectical thinking, he himself was more inclined towards the conservative aspect of this system; all historical development was merely the development of his own “Absolute Idea,” and even his Absolute Idea itself was a philosophized god. As for Feuerbach, although he profoundly criticized Christianity, he still could not break his religious complex; he wanted to create a religion of “love” to satisfy people’s religious needs.

在宗教研究和宗教批判的理论斗争中，德国古典哲学比起法国哲学虽然更加深刻，但不如法国哲学的是，德国古典哲学以及创立这些辉煌哲学的哲学家们，几乎都拖着一条宗教的尾巴。康德认为，即使没有上帝（God），为了道德的需要，也要创造一个God。黑格尔虽然构建了本质上是革命的辩证法思维体系，但他本人，却更倾向于这个体系的保守方面，一切历史的发展，不过都是他的“绝对理念”自身的发展，甚至他的绝对理念本身，就是一个哲学化了的神。直到费尔巴哈，虽然深刻地批判了基督教，但仍然断不了他的宗教情结，他要创立一个“爱”的宗教，以满足人们的宗教需要。

Therefore, to make theory radical and “grasp things by the root,” it was also necessary to criticize classical German philosophy itself, which had “essentially completed” the task of religious criticism, and to establish a truly scientific religious studies, which is also a truly scientific philosophy. This step was completed by Marx and Engels.

因此，要使理论彻底，“抓住事物的根本”，还必须对“基本完成”了宗教批判任务的德国古典哲学本身进行批判，建立真正科学的宗教学，也是真正科学的哲学。这一步，是由马克思和恩格斯完成的。

II. Marx’s Critique of Hegel and His Successors

二、马克思对黑格尔及其后继者的批判

After the criticism of religion was essentially completed, the first thing Marx had to do was to critique Hegel’s philosophy of right:

对宗教的批判基本完成以后，马克思首先要做的，是对黑格尔法哲学的批判：

“Thus the criticism of heaven turns into the criticism of earth, the criticism of religion into the criticism of law, and the criticism of theology into the criticism of politics.” [20]20 Marx, “Contribution to the Critique,” p. 176.

“因此，真理的彼岸世界消逝以后，历史的任务就是确立此岸世界的真理。人的自我异化的神圣形象被揭穿以后，揭露具有非神圣形象的自我异化，就成了为历史服务的哲学的迫切任务。于是，对天国的批判变成对尘世的批判，对宗教的批判变成对法的批判，对神学的批判变成对政治的批判。”

Because Germany’s state philosophy and legal philosophy received their most systematic, richest, and final expression in Hegel’s works, the critique of Hegel’s philosophy of right is “both a critical analysis of the modern state and of the reality connected with it, and a decisive negation of the entire hitherto existing form of German political and legal consciousness.”

由于德国的国家哲学和法哲学在黑格尔的著作中得到了最系统、最丰富和最终的表述，所以对黑格尔法哲学的批判，“既是对现代国家以及同它相联系的现实所作的批判性分析，又是对迄今为止的德国政治意识和法意识的整个形式的坚决否定”。

Yet Marx did not complete the writing of *A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right*, nor was the manuscript of this book published during his lifetime. For in the very process of writing *A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right*, Marx discovered that the philosophical path of his comrades who were also critiquing Hegel’s philosophy alongside him—that is, the so-called “Young Hegelians”—was unacceptable.

然而马克思没有完成《黑格尔法哲学批判》这部著作的写作，马克思在世时，这本书的文稿也没有出版。因为就在马克思写作《黑格尔法哲学批判》的过程中，马克思发现，和自己一起批判黑格尔哲学的同伴们，也就是所谓“青年黑格尔派”的同伴们，其哲学道路是不可接受的。

According to the account of Marx and Engels in *The German Ideology*, after Hegel’s death in 1831, the philosophers who had originally followed Hegel’s philosophy split into the “Old Hegelians” and the “Young Hegelians.” The Old Hegelians focused on conserving Hegel’s system. They believed that “by classifying everything under Hegel’s logical categories, they understood everything.” The Young Hegelians focused on elaborating Hegel’s dialectical method. The main members of this faction, “from Strauss to Stirner, the whole German philosophical critique limited itself to the critique of religious ideas,” “insisting that everything was contained in religious ideas or declaring everything to be theological, thereby critiquing everything.” In this way, “the rule of religion was taken as a premise. All dominant relations were gradually declared to be religious relations.”

依据马克思恩格斯在《德意志意识形态》中的叙述，自从黑格尔于1931年去世以后，原来追随黑格尔哲学的哲学家们就分化为“老年黑格尔派”和“青年黑格尔派”。老年派注重于保守黑格尔的体系。他们认为，“只要把一切都归入黑格尔的逻辑范畴，他们就理解了一切。”青年派则注重阐述黑格尔的辩证法思想。这一派的主要成员，“从施特劳斯到施蒂纳的整个德国哲学批判都局限于对宗教观念的批判”，“硬说一切都包含宗教观念或者宣布一切都是神学上的东西，由此来批判一切”。这样一来，“宗教的统治被当成了前提。一切占统治地位的关系逐渐地都被宣布为宗教的关系。”

Yet no matter which faction, all their efforts at critiquing Germany never left the terrain of philosophy. All the problems they discussed arose on the basis of the Hegelian system. They all claimed to have surpassed Hegel’s philosophy, but in reality, they merely seized upon one aspect of Hegel’s philosophy to oppose his entire system, without a single person attempting a comprehensive critique of the Hegelian system.

然而不论哪一派，他们对德国的批判，所做的种种努力，都没有离开过哲学的阵地。他们所谈的全部问题，都是在黑格尔体系的基础上产生的。他们都断言自己超越了黑格尔哲学，但实际上，都不过是仅仅抓住了黑格尔哲学的某一个方面，来反对黑格尔的整个体系，却没有一个人试图对黑格尔体系进行全面的批判。

Marx and Engels were once members of the Young Hegelian school, a faction that emphasized Hegel’s dialectical method and had a strong revolutionary tendency. Yet, like the Old Hegelians, the members of this school turned the products of consciousness—ideas, thoughts, concepts, etc.—into something independent, believing that these things were the real shackles of people. Therefore, the so-called critique of the earthly world only needed to struggle against these illusions of consciousness. Thus, the only result such critique could achieve was to offer some explanations of Christianity from the history of religion, and even then, one-sided explanations. Among them, “not one of them thought to raise the question of the connection between German philosophy and German reality,” “the connection between their critique and their own material environment.” But Marx and Engels discovered:

马克思和恩格斯，曾经都是青年黑格尔学派的成员，这是一个注重黑格尔的辩证方法、具有强烈革命倾向的派别。然而，和老年黑格尔派一样，这个学派的成员都把意识的产物：观念、思想、概念等等，变为某种独立的东西，认为这些东西才是人们的真正枷锁。因此，所谓对尘世的批判，只要同意识的这些幻想进行斗争就行了。因此，这样的批判所能达到的唯一结果，只是从宗教史上对基督教作一些说明，而且还是片面的说明。在他们中间，“没有一个想到要提出关于德国哲学和德国现实之间的联系问题”，“关于他们所作的批判和他们自身的物质环境之间的联系问题。”但是马克思、恩格斯发现：

“The production of ideas, of conceptions, of consciousness, is at first directly interwoven with the material activity and the material intercourse of men, the language of real life. Conceiving, thinking, the mental intercourse of men, appear at this stage as the direct efflux of their material behavior. The same applies to mental production as expressed in the language of the politics, laws, morality, religion, metaphysics, etc., of a people.”

“思想、观念、意识的生产最初是直接与人们的物质活动，与人们的物质交往，与现实生活的语言交织在一起的。人们的想象、思维、精神交往在这里还是人们物质行动的直接产物。表现在某一民族的政治、法律、道德、宗教、形而上学等的语言中的精神生产也是这样。”

As for religion, it “is from the outset consciousness of the transcendent,” but “this consciousness arises from real forces.” Therefore, all critique concerning religious ideas, or in other words, all philosophical critique, if it does not touch upon the connection between philosophy or religious ideas and reality, can at most offer only one-sided explanations of certain religious or philosophical problems.

至于宗教，它“从一开始就是超验性的意识”，但“这种意识是从现实的力量中产生的。”因此，一切事关宗教观念的批判，或者说，一切哲学批判，如果不触及哲学或宗教观念与现实之间的联系，这种批判最多也只能对某些宗教或哲学问题做出一些片面的说明。

After Hegel’s death, the critical edge of the Hegelian school was often directed at Hegel’s philosophy, which was at that time Germany’s state philosophy, the ruling thought of the state, or in other words, the thought of the ruling class in Germany at that time. Marx and Engels pointed out:

黑格尔去世以后的黑格尔学派，其批判的锋芒，往往都指向黑格尔哲学，而黑格尔哲学乃是当时德国的国家哲学，国家的统治思想，或者说，是当时德国统治阶级的思想。马克思、恩格斯指出：

“The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas: i.e., the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the means of mental production, so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the means of mental production are subject to it.”

“统治阶级的思想在每一时代都是占统治地位的思想。这就是说，一个阶级是社会上占统治地位的物质力量，同时也是社会上占统治地位的精神力量。支配着物质生产资料的阶级，同时也支配着精神生产资料，因此，那些没有精神生产资料的人的思想，一般地是隶属于这个阶级的。”

Yet the class itself is the product of the processes of production and exchange. The modern bourgeoisie is the product of a series of transformations in the mode of production and exchange; the proletariat, i.e., the modern working class, is the product of large-scale industry.

然而阶级本身，则是生产过程和交换过程的产物。现代资产阶级是生产方式和交换方式的一系列变革的产物；无产阶级即现代工人阶级，则是大工业的产物。

Therefore, to accomplish the historical task of “establishing the truth of this world,” it is necessary to “turn the critique of heaven into the critique of earth.” In contrast to classical German philosophy, which “descends from heaven to earth,” the critique of Marx and Engels “ascends from earth to heaven.”

因此，要完成“确立此岸世界的真理”的历史任务，就必须把“对天国的批判变成对尘世的批判”。和德国古典哲学相反，德国古典哲学是“从天国降到人间”；马克思、恩格斯的批判则是“从人间升到天国。”

To accomplish such a critique, in order to establish “the truth of this world,” after *A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right*, in 1844 Marx completed his *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts*; in 1844-1845, Engels completed *The Condition of the Working Class in England*; from autumn 1845 to May 1846, Marx and Engels jointly wrote *The German Ideology*, which expounded the materialist conception of history and communist theory; until 1848, the two cooperated to complete *The Communist Manifesto*.

为了完成这样的批判，以确立“此岸世界的真理”，在《黑格尔法哲学批判》之后，1844年，马克思完成了他的《经济学哲学手稿》；1844-1845年，恩格斯完成了《英国工人阶级状况》；1845年秋至1846年5月，马克思和恩格斯共同撰写了阐述唯物史观和共产主义理论的《德意志意识形态》，直到1848年，二人合作完成《共产党宣言》。

The series of philosophical and economic works represented by these writings are not only the fruits of Marx and Engels’ in-depth study of social politics, economy, philosophy, and religion, but also the fruits of their critique of German philosophy and religious studies. The establishment of the dialectical materialist and historical materialist worldview is their philosophical achievement and also their achievement in religious studies.

以这些著作为代表的一系列哲学、经济学著作，不仅是马克思、恩格斯深入研究社会政治经济、哲学、宗教的成果，也是他们对德国哲学、宗教学批判的成果。辩证唯物主义和历史唯物主义世界观的建立，是他们的哲学成就，也是他们的宗教学成就。

However, the German philosopher most critiqued by Marx and Engels was not Hegel, not Kant, not Bauer or Stirner, but the materialist philosopher Feuerbach, who had a revolutionary influence on their thought.

不过马克思、恩格斯批判最多的德国哲学家，不是黑格尔，不是康德，也不是鲍威尔、施蒂纳等，而是对他们的思想发生过革命影响的唯物主义哲学家费尔巴哈。

III. Marx and Engels’ Critique of Feuerbach

三、马克思、恩格斯对费尔巴哈的批判

The German philosophical critique that had been circling within Hegel’s “pure spirit” system opened a new situation with the publication of Feuerbach’s *The Essence of Christianity*. Engels described the revolutionary impact brought by the publication of *The Essence of Christianity* as follows:

在黑格尔“纯粹精神”体系中兜圈子的德国哲学批判，由于费尔巴哈《基督教的本质》的出版，开创了一个新的局面。恩格斯这样描述《基督教的本质》的出版所带来的革命性影响：

“Then all were enthusiastic: we all became Feuerbachians at once.”

“那时大家都很兴奋：我们一时都成为费尔巴哈派了。”

Because Feuerbach’s thought restored materialism to the throne, and Hegel was cast aside. Yet although this new philosophy gave Marx and Engels a joy as if they had undergone a revolution, it could not fully satisfy them. To truly complete the task from religious critique and philosophical critique to the critique of the earthly world, in order to “establish the truth of this world,” it was also necessary to critique this new philosophy before a truly correct worldview could be established.

因为费尔巴哈的思想，使唯物主义重新登上王座，黑格尔被抛到了一旁。然而这个新哲学虽然使马克思、恩格斯感到了如同经过革命一样的喜悦，但是并不能令他们完全满意。要真正完成从宗教批判、哲学批判到对尘世批判的任务，以“确立此岸世界的真理”，还必须对这种新哲学进行批判，才能建立真正正确的世界观。

In 1841, Feuerbach’s *The Essence of Christianity* was published. In the spring of 1845, Marx wrote *Theses on Feuerbach*. This famous philosophical work, praised by Engels as “the first document in which is deposited the genius of the new world outlook,” directly confronted and criticized Feuerbach’s *The Essence of Christianity*. From the autumn of 1845 to May 1846, Marx and Engels collaborated to write *The German Ideology*. The title of the first chapter of its first volume is “Feuerbach,” meaning that their critique of the then German ideology began first and foremost with a critique of Feuerbach’s philosophy. It was precisely in this critique of Feuerbach’s philosophy in the first chapter of the first volume that Marx and Engels, for the first time, systematically expounded historical materialism. Decades later, in 1886, Engels wrote *Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy*. This is “an important work in which Engels expounds the basic principles of Marxist philosophy.” In this work, “Engels discusses the historical process of the formation and development of Marxist philosophy, specifically explains its theoretical sources and natural scientific foundations, elaborates in detail the critical inheritance relationship and essential differences between Marxist philosophy and classical German philosophy, deeply analyzes the essence and significance of the revolutionary transformation brought about in the field of philosophy by the birth of Marxist philosophy, and systematically expounds the basic principles of dialectical materialism and historical materialism.” Moreover, “this work also systematically expounds the basic principles of historical materialism, such as the driving forces of historical development, the determining role of the economic base and the reaction of the superstructure, and the people as the creators of history.” “Lenin believed that this work, like the *Communist Manifesto*, is a book every class-conscious worker must read.” That is to say, the important works in which Marx and Engels established the philosophy of dialectical materialism and historical materialism were almost all completed in the process of directly discussing and criticizing Feuerbach’s *The Essence of Christianity*. And *The Essence of Christianity* is not only Feuerbach’s philosophical work but, first and foremost, his work on religious studies.

1841年，费尔巴哈《基督教的本质》出版。1845年春，马克思撰写了《关于费尔巴哈的提纲》。这篇被恩格斯誉为“包含着新世界观的天才萌芽的第一个文献”的哲学名著，它直接面对和批判的，就是费尔巴哈的《基督教的本质》。1845年秋至1846年5月，马克思与恩格斯合作，共同撰写了《德意志意识形态》。其第一卷第一章，标题就是《费尔巴哈》，也就是说，他们对当时德意志意识形态的批判，首先批判的，也是费尔巴哈的哲学。就在这第一卷第一章对费尔巴哈哲学的批判中，马克思、恩格斯首次对历史唯物主义作了比较系统的阐述。几十年后，1886年，恩格斯撰写了《费尔巴哈和德国古典哲学的终结》。这是“恩格斯阐述马克思主义哲学基本原理的重要著作。”在这篇著作中，“恩格斯论述了马克思主义哲学形成和发展的历史过程，具体说明了它的理论来源和自然科学基础，详细论证了马克思主义哲学同德国古典哲学之间的批判继承关系和本质区别，深刻地分析了马克思主义哲学的诞生在哲学领域中引起革命变革的实质和意义，系统地阐述了辩证唯物主义和历史唯物主义的基本原理。”不仅如此，“这篇著作还系统地论述了历史发展的动力、经济基础的决定作用和上层建筑的反作用、人民群众是历史的创造者等历史唯物主义基本原理。” “列宁认为，这篇著作‘同《共产党宣言》一样，都是每个觉悟工人必读的书籍’。”也就是说，马克思、恩格斯他们创立辩证唯物主义和历史唯物主义哲学的重要著作，几乎都是在直接讨论和批判费尔巴哈的《基督教的本质》的过程中完成的。而《基督教的本质》不仅是费尔巴哈的哲学著作，而首先是费尔巴哈的宗教学著作。

Marx and Engels’ critique of Feuerbach was first and foremost because Feuerbach “does not understand the significance of ‘revolutionary,’ ‘practical-critical’ activity.” However, “all social life is essentially practical.” “The coincidence of the changing of circumstances and of human activity or self-change can be conceived and rationally understood only as revolutionary practice.” “The question whether objective truth can be attributed to human thinking is not a question of theory but is a practical question.”

马克思、恩格斯对费尔巴哈的批判，首先是因为费尔巴哈“不了解‘革命的’、‘实践批判的’活动的意义。”然而，“全部社会生活在本质上是实践的。”“环境的改变和人的活动或自我改变的一致，只能被看做是并合理地理解为革命的实践。”“人的思维是否具有客观的［gegenst ndliche］真理性，这不是一个理论的问题，而是一个实践的问题。”

“Social life is essentially practical.” That is to say, social life itself is the practical activity of human beings. In the various and diverse forms of practice, human beings change their environment and also come to know the world in which they live. Especially those conscious practical activities aimed at transforming reality, while strengthening the transformation of the environment with the greatest force, also accelerate human understanding of the environment with the greatest force. And almost all people participating in practical activities have their own purposeful activities. If the goal is achieved, it proves that their original understanding was correct. If the goal is not achieved or not fully achieved, it proves that their original understanding was incorrect or not entirely correct. Therefore, the question of whether human cognition possesses objective truth is not a theoretical question but a practical one. Decades later, in *Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy*, Engels revisited the issue of practice. He gave an example: experiments and industry can extract alizarin from coal tar, which proves that the understanding of coal tar is correct, and thus Kant’s elusive “thing-in-itself” is finished. But Feuerbach did not understand the significance of “revolutionary,” “practical-critical” activity; “in *The Essence of Christianity* he regards only theoretical activity as the genuinely human activity.”

“社会生活在本质上是实践的。”也就是说，社会生活本身，乃是人类的实践活动。在形形色色、各种各样的实践活动中，人类改变着他们的环境，也认识着他们所处其中的世界。特别是那些自觉的、旨在变革现实的实践活动，一面以最大的力度加强着对环境的变革，同时也以最大的力度加速着人类对环境的认识。而所有参与实践活动的人们，几乎都是他们自己有目的的活动。目的达到了，证明他们原先的认识是正确的。目的没有达到或者没有完全达到，证明他们原来的认识是不正确或者不完全正确的。因此，人的认识是否具有客观真理性的问题，不是一个理论问题，而是一个实践问题。数十年后，恩格斯在《费尔巴哈和德国古典哲学的终结》一文中，又重提实践问题。并举例说，实验和工业能够从煤焦油中提炼出茜素，就说明对煤焦油的认识是正确的，而康德的不可捉摸的“自在之物”就完结了。但是费尔巴哈却不懂得“革命的”“实践批判的”活动的意义，“他在《基督教的本质》中仅仅把理论的活动看做是真正人的活动。”

The second major shortcoming for which Marx and Engels criticized Feuerbach’s philosophy was that he reduced the essence of religion to the essence of man. However, the essence of man he spoke of was “an abstraction inherent in each single individual.” Marx opposed Feuerbach’s abstract discussion of the essence of man and put forward the famous thesis that “man is the ensemble of all social relations”:

马克思恩格斯批判费尔巴哈哲学的第二个重大缺点，就是他把宗教的本质归结于人的本质，然而，他所说的人的本质，乃是“单个人所固有的抽象物”。马克思反对费尔巴哈抽象地谈论人的本质，并且提出了著名的“人是一切社会关系总和”的著名论断：

“Feuerbach resolves the religious essence into the human essence. But the human essence is no abstraction inherent in each single individual. In its reality, it is the ensemble of all social relations.”

“费尔巴哈把宗教的本质归结于人的本质。但是，人的本质不是单个人所固有的抽象物，在其现实性上，它是一切社会关系的总和。”

Decades later, in *Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy*, Engels once again, and in more detail, discussed Feuerbach’s abstract “man”:

数十年后，恩格斯在《费尔巴哈和德国古典哲学的终结》中，再一次、更详尽地讨论了费尔巴哈那个抽象的“人”：

“In form he is realistic, he takes man as his starting point; but he has no world in which this man lives, and hence this man remains always the same abstract man that appears in the philosophy of religion.”

“就形式讲，他（按：费尔巴哈）是实在论的，他把人作为出发点；但是，关于这个人生活的世界却根本没有讲到，因而这个人始终是在宗教哲学中出现的那种抽象的人。”

Such a man is not “a real, living man” who “does not live in a real world historically come into being and historically determined.” Starting from such a man, Feuerbach designed for them a new religion: the religion of “love.” He hoped that within this religion of love, humanity could live in harmony and the world would be at peace. Engels criticized:

这样的人，“不是生活在现实的、历史地发生和历史地确定了的世界里面”的、“现实的、活生生的人”。从这样的人出发，费尔巴哈为他们设计出了一个新的宗教：“爱”的宗教。他希望人类能在这爱的宗教里，大家和睦相处，天下太平。恩格斯批评说：

“Feuerbach’s morality is like all its predecessors. It is designed for all times, all peoples, and all circumstances; and precisely for that reason it is never and nowhere applicable; it remains, as regards the real world, as powerless as Kant’s categorical imperative.”

“费尔巴哈的道德论是和它的一切前驱者一样。它是为一切时代、一切民族、一切情况而设计出来的；正因为如此，它在任何时候和任何地方都是不适用的，而在现实世界面前，是和康德的绝对命令一样软弱无力的。”

“To get from the abstract man of Feuerbach to real, living men, one must study these men as acting in history.” But Feuerbach opposed doing so. For the worship of abstract man is the core of his new religion. This step that Feuerbach did not take—replacing abstract man with “the science of real men and their historical development”—“the work of going beyond Feuerbach and further developing Feuerbach’s standpoint was begun by Marx in 1845 in *The Holy Family*.” Therefore, although *The Holy Family* is marked as a critique of Bruno Bauer and his associates, it is also the theoretical achievement of Marx and Engels in “going beyond Feuerbach and developing Feuerbach’s standpoint.”

“要从费尔巴哈的抽象的人转到现实的、活生生的人，就必须把这些人作为在历史中行动的人去考察。”但是费尔巴哈反对这样做。因为对抽象人的崇拜，是他的新宗教的核心。费尔巴哈没有走的这一步，即用“现实的人及其历史发展的科学”代替抽象的人，“这个超出费尔巴哈而进一步发展费尔巴哈观点的工作，是由马克思于1845年在《神圣家族》中开始的。”因此，《神圣家族》虽然标明的是批判布鲁诺·鲍威尔及其伙伴，但也是马克思、恩格斯所做的“超出费尔巴哈又发展费尔巴哈观点”的理论建树。

In *Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy*, Engels put forward a famous philosophical proposition:

在《费尔巴哈和德国古典哲学的终结》一书中，恩格斯提出了一个著名的哲学命题：

“The great basic question of all philosophy, especially of more recent philosophy, is that concerning the relation of thinking and being.”

“全部哲学，特别是近代哲学的重大的基本问题，是思维和存在的关系问题。”

This classic proposition in philosophy is first and foremost also a proposition in religious studies. For immediately after this statement, Engels first discusses the relationship between soul and body, the question of how the concept of spirits arises, and finally reduces it to the question of the origin of the world:

这个哲学中的经典命题，首先也是个宗教学的命题。因为就在这句话之后，恩格斯谈论的，首先是灵魂和肉体的关系问题，神灵观念如何产生的问题，最后归结为世界本原的问题：

“What is primary, spirit or nature? — this question, in relation to the church, took the form: Did God create the world, or has the world existed from eternity?”

“什么是本原的，是精神，还是自然界？———这个问题以尖锐的形式针对着教会提了出来：世界是神创造的呢，还是从来就有的？”

Philosophers are divided into two great camps according to how they answer this question.

哲学家依照他们如何回答这个问题而分成了两大阵营。

Therefore, this classic philosophical proposition is first and foremost a proposition in religious studies. At the very end of this work, Engels devotes a large section specifically to discussing the question of religion, from the origin of religion to the European Reformation and the general laws of religious development. Thus, the famous philosophical works of Engels and Marx are at the same time their works on religious studies.

因此，这个经典的哲学命题，首先就是个宗教学的命题。就在这部著作最后，恩格斯又用很大的篇幅，专门讨论了宗教问题。从宗教的起源讨论到欧洲的宗教改革，宗教发展的一般规律。因此，恩格斯以及马克思那些著名的哲学著作，同时又是他们的宗教学著作。

IV. Marxist Religious Studies and Marxist Philosophy

四、马克思主义宗教学与马克思主义哲学

Based on the above discussion, we can say that Marxist philosophy and Marxist religious studies share the same root and are symbiotically related. Their theoretical foundation is completely identical, one could even say it is the same. Due to their different tasks, as they further develop and address their respective specific issues, they have branched into two systems of thought.

根据以上的讨论，我们可以说，马克思主义哲学和马克思主义宗教学是同根共生的关系，二者的理论基础完全相同，甚至可以说是同一个。由于各自的任务不同，在进一步发展、涉及各自具体问题时，分成了两个思想体系。

Because the direct source of Marxist philosophy is classical German philosophy, and classical German philosophy was itself established in the process of criticizing religion, therefore, to deeply understand classical German philosophy and to deeply understand Marxist philosophy, one must conduct in-depth research on religious issues. As for being able to criticize classical German philosophy, discard its dross and select its essence, it is also necessary to have a deeper study of religious issues. Marx and Engels’ research on religious issues is precisely the foundation on which they were able to surpass classical German philosophy and carry out a critical inheritance of it. In this sense, only by deeply understanding religious issues and understanding Marxist study of religion can one deeply understand Marxist philosophy.

由于马克思主义哲学的直接来源是德国古典哲学，而德国古典哲学又是在批判宗教的过程中建立起来的，因此，要深刻理解德国古典哲学，深刻理解马克思主义哲学，就必须深入研究宗教问题。至于要能够批判德国古典哲学,弃其糟粕,取其精华，又必须对宗教问题有更深入的研究。马克思、恩格斯对于宗教问题的研究，正是他们能够超越德国古典哲学并对之进行批判继承的基础。就这个意义上说，只有深刻理解宗教问题，理解马克思主义宗教学，才能深刻理解马克思主义的哲学。

Mr. Ren Jiyu, the founder and pioneer of Chinese Marxist study of religion who was praised by Mao Zedong, said in 1979:

受到毛泽东赞许的、中国马克思主义宗教学的开创者和奠基人任继愈先生于1979年说过：

“Before the birth of Marxism, all research in the field of human social history was guided by the idealist conception of history. Past research on religion, including historical atheism, could not possibly be truly scientific. The founders of Marxism used the scientific worldview of dialectical materialism and historical materialism to conduct extensive research on religious issues, summarized the achievements of previous research on religion, critically inherited the legacy of various historical atheisms, and laid the foundation for Marxist study of religion, from which point the study of religion became a science. Marxist study of religion is an important aspect of the entire scientific system of Marxism.”

“马克思主义诞生前,人类对社会历史领域的一切研究,其指导思想是唯心史观。过去关于宗教的研究，包括历史上的无神论，都不可能是真正科学的。马克思主义的奠基人用辩证唯物主义和历史唯物主义的科学世界观对宗教问题进行了大量的研究，总结了前人关于宗教研究的成果，批判地继承了历史上各种无神论的遗产，奠定了马克思主义宗教学的基础，从此宗教学成为一门科学。马克思主义宗教学是马克思主义整个科学体系的一个重要方面。”

Due to various reasons, for a long time, in Marxist research, either the study of Marxist philosophy has been used to cover the study of Marxist study of religion, or it has been completely denied that Marxism even has a study of religion, with the result that the entire discipline of Marxist study of religion has not developed well in our country.

由于种种原因，长期以来，在马克思主义研究中，或是以马克思主义的哲学研究涵盖马克思主义宗教学研究，或是根本不承认马克思主义还有宗教学，以致马克思主义宗教学整个学科在我们国家未能得到很好的发展。

Now, various changes in domestic and international realities have elevated religious issues to an increasingly important position. The National Conference on Religious Work, which concluded in December 2021, [27]27 The National Conference on Religious Work (全国宗教工作会议) is a high-level meeting convened by the CPC Central Committee to set policy guidelines for religious affairs. The most recent such conference was held in December 2021. proposed the task of “strengthening the disciplinary construction of Marxist study of religion.” This points a direction for the study of religion and also points a new direction for Marxist research. Therefore, Marxist research should place Marxist study of religion in a position as important as Marxist philosophy.

现在，国内、国际现实状况的种种变化，把宗教问题提到越来越重要的地位。2021年12月刚刚闭幕的全国宗教会议上，提出了要“加强马克思主义宗教学学科建设”的任务。这是给宗教学研究指明了方向，也是给马克思主义研究指明了新的方向。因此，马克思主义研究，应该把马克思主义宗教学放在和马克思主义哲学同等重要的地位。

Online editor: Tongxin

网络编辑：同心