An Exploration of Mao Zedong’s Anti-Superstition Thought during the May Fourth Period

The May Fourth period was a crucial transitional era in which Chinese social thought shifted and the social form evolved from tradition to modernity. In the view of the modern intellectual circles, superstition, as a relic of the old era, ran counter to China’s modernizing transformation. The contradiction and conflict between the two stirred fierce collisions among different viewpoints and discourses, giving birth to and forming rich intellectual achievements. Mao Zedong, situated in the torrent of the times, deeply participated in the formation of modern anti-superstition discourse through his reflections on the problem of superstition during this period of social transformation. Current academic research on Mao Zedong’s anti-superstition thought has already yielded considerable results, whether by revealing Mao’s deep reflections on the problem of superstition from the perspectives of its formative background, connotation and significance, historical meaning, and modern inspiration; or by focusing on the formation of Mao’s scientific spirit from the starting point of anti-superstition; or by grounding the analysis in different historical periods and using specific texts to outline the historical trajectory of Mao’s understanding of religious superstition. Existing research has laid a solid foundation for exploring Mao Zedong’s anti-superstition thought, but most of these studies treat the May Fourth period as a whole as the embryonic stage of Mao’s anti-superstition thought, lacking a focused discussion and concentrated exposition of this period. To a certain extent, they overlook the process of Mao’s profound reflection on and theoretical innovation regarding the problem of superstition under the influence of the trends of science and democracy. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a more detailed analysis of the formation process of Mao Zedong’s anti-superstition discourse during the May Fourth period, revealing its close connection with the historical context, in order to achieve a more comprehensive understanding and interpretation of the full picture of Mao’s anti-superstition thought during the May Fourth period.

五四时期是中国社会思潮变迁、社会形态由传统向现代嬗变的重要转型期。在近代知识界看来,迷信作为旧时代的遗留物,与中国社会的现代化转型相悖。两者之间的矛盾与冲突激起不同观点和话语的激烈碰撞,孕育并形成了丰富的思想成果。毛泽东身处时代洪流之中,其在社会变革时期对于迷信问题的思考也深度参与到近代反迷信话语的形成历程之中。目前学界对毛泽东反迷信思想的研究已颇具成果,或从形成背景、内涵意蕴、历史意义、现代启示等方面揭示毛泽东对迷信问题的深度思考;或从反迷信出发,关注毛泽东科学精神的形成历程;或立足于不同历史时期,以具体文本勾勒毛泽东认识宗教迷信问题的历史轨迹。现有研究为探讨毛泽东反迷信思想奠定了坚实的基础,但这些研究大多将五四时期整体性视为毛泽东反迷信思想的萌芽时期,缺乏对这一时期的专题探讨和集中论述,在一定程度上忽视了毛泽东在科学与民主思潮的影响下,对迷信问题进行深刻反思和理论创新的过程。因此,有必要对五四时期毛泽东反迷信话语的形成过程进行更为细致的剖析,揭示其与时代背景的密切关联,以期对毛泽东五四时期反迷信思想的全貌进行更加全面的认识与阐释。

I. The Individual and the Era: The Initial Formation of Mao Zedong’s Anti-Superstition Thought

一、个人与时代:毛泽东反迷信思想的初步形成

Mao Zedong’s anti-superstition thought was not innate. In his childhood, Mao lived in a rural society where traditional concepts were deeply entrenched and religious belief was strong. For Hunan society in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, folk superstitious customs were still very prevalent. For example, the August 14, 1905, issue of the *Shenbao* recorded: “The people of Hunan are superstitious about gods and religions; the expenses for temple festivals and theatrical performances are exorbitant,” and because the rituals for gods and religions cost so much, timber prices remained high.

毛泽东的反迷信思想并非与生俱来。幼年时期的毛泽东生活于传统观念根深蒂固、宗教信仰浓厚的乡村社会。对19世纪末20世纪初的湖南社会而言,民间的迷信风气仍十分盛行。如1905年8月14日的《申报》记载:“湘人迷信神教,赛会演剧所费不赁”,因神教仪式耗费颇多,致使林木价格高居不下。

Schools, newspapers, and study societies constituted the basic space for public interaction and public opinion in modern China, and also became important platforms for modern intellectuals to communicate and exchange ideas. The initial formation of Mao Zedong’s anti-superstition thought was closely related to his extensive participation in the modern public sphere. Through education in schools, reading newspapers, and discussions and social practice in study societies, Mao extensively came into contact with Western Enlightenment thought and modern scientific knowledge, gradually forming an ideological tendency to criticize superstition and advocate science.

学堂、报刊与学会构成了近代中国公共交往与公共舆论的基本空间,也成为近代知识分子沟通联络、交流思想的重要平台。毛泽东反迷信思想的初步形成,与其在近代公共领域的广泛参与密切相关。通过学堂的教育、报刊的阅读以及在学会中的讨论与社会实践,毛泽东广泛接触了西方启蒙思想和现代科学知识,逐渐形成了批判迷信、倡导科学的思想倾向。

(1) Scientific Education in Modern Schools

(一)近代学堂的科学教育

Mao Zedong’s early years of study were a crucial period for the initial formation of his anti-superstition thought. In 1936, when talking with the American journalist Edgar Snow, Mao mentioned: “The books I read gradually began to influence me, and I myself became more and more skeptical.” Mao first attended a traditional private school in Shaoshan, receiving a traditional Confucian education, with the Four Books and Five Classics [1]1 The Four Books and Five Classics are the canonical texts of Confucianism. The Four Books are the *Great Learning*, the *Doctrine of the Mean*, the *Analects*, and the *Mencius*; the Five Classics are the *Book of Changes*, the *Book of Documents*, the *Book of Songs*, the *Book of Rites*, and the *Spring and Autumn Annals*. and other Confucian classics as the main teaching materials. But he did not like these classics very much; instead, he preferred legendary novels with a spirit of struggle, such as *The Biography of Yue Fei*, *Water Margin*, *Romance of the Three Kingdoms*, and *Journey to the West*. In 1907, while Mao was out of school and farming at home, through the introduction of a cousin, he read reformist books such as Zheng Guanying’s *Warnings to a Prosperous Age* and Feng Guifen’s *Protest from the Jiaobin Studio*, gaining an initial understanding of the situation of foreign aggression and national crisis, and was influenced by them to resume his studies. In 1909, while studying at a private school in Shaoshan Chong, Mao already showed a cognition distinct from traditional theistic views. At that time, a reformist teacher named Li Shuqing came from elsewhere and often told the people of Shaoshan about his experiences in various places, advocating “abolishing temples, establishing schools, and opposing belief in Buddha.” Although others gossiped about Li Shuqing’s remarks, Mao admired his views “and established a teacher-student and friend relationship with him.” In 1910, Mao entered the Dongshan Higher Primary School in Xiangxiang County, where he studied natural sciences and other new subjects. During his time at Dongshan School, Mao initially came into contact with the *Xinmin Congbao* (New Citizen Journal), edited by Liang Qichao. The *Xinmin Congbao*, with the aim of “enlightening the people’s wisdom” and “rejuvenating our country,” published articles commenting on religion, such as “The Gains and Losses of Religious Figures and Philosophers” and “Preserving Confucianism Is Not the Way to Respect Confucius.” Mao “read and reread” the *Xinmin Congbao* “until he could recite it.” In 1912, while studying on his own at the Xiangxiang Guild Hall, Mao extensively read modern European social science and natural science books, devouring the works of Enlightenment thinkers such as Adam Smith, Montesquieu, and Rousseau, and deeply engaged with the modern scientific and rational worldview. In particular, by reading Huxley’s *Evolution and Ethics* and Darwin’s works on the origin of species, Mao further deepened his suspicion of theology and religion, gradually forming a scientific and dialectical mode of thinking. He also regarded this half-year of self-study as “extremely valuable.”

毛泽东早年求学时期是其反迷信思想初步形成的关键时期。1936年,毛泽东与美国记者埃德加.斯诺交谈时曾提道:“我看的书,逐渐对我产生了影响,我自己也越来越怀疑了。”毛泽东最初就读于韶山私塾,接受传统儒家教育,以四书五经等儒学经典为主要教材。但他对于这些经书并不十分喜欢,反而更青睐于《精忠传》《水浒传》《三国演义》《西游记》等具有斗争精神的传奇小说。1907年,毛泽东停学在家务农期间,经表兄介绍,读到郑观应的《盛世危言》和冯桂芬的《校邻庐抗议》等改良派书籍,对外国侵略、民族危亡的现状有了初步认知,并受此影响重新恢复学业。1909年,毛泽东在韶山冲私塾就读时,已展现出区别于传统有神观念的认知。当时一位维新派教师李漱清由外地而来,时常向韶山人讲述各地见闻,宣扬“废庙宇、办学校、反对信佛”。尽管旁人对李漱清的言论多有议论,但毛泽东却钦佩他的主张,“并同他建立了师生和朋友关系”。1910年,毛泽东进入湘乡县立东山高等小学堂,学习了自然科学及其他新学科。在东山学堂期间,毛泽东初步接触到梁启超主编的《新民丛报》。《新民丛报》以“启迪民智”“维新我国”为旨归,刊载了《宗教家与哲学家之长短得失》《保教非所以尊孔论》等评议宗教的文章。毛泽东将《新民丛报》“读了又读,直到可以背出来”。1912年,毛泽东在湘乡会馆自修期间,广泛地涉猎欧洲近代社会科学和自然科学书籍,博览了亚当.斯密、孟德斯鸠、卢梭等启蒙思想家的著作,深入接触了近代科学与理性的世界观。特别是通过阅读赫胥黎《天演论》和达尔文关于物种起源的书籍,毛泽东进一步加深了对神学和宗教的怀疑,逐步形成了科学的、辩证的思维方式。他也将这自学的半年视作“极有价值”的半年。

In 1913, Mao Zedong entered the preparatory course of the Hunan Provincial Fourth Normal School. The following year, the Fourth Normal School merged with the Hunan Provincial First Normal School. Under the guidance of teachers such as Yang Changji, Xu Teli, and Li Jinxi, Mao conducted in-depth study of philosophy and ethics, and deepened his thinking and cognition regarding religious ethics. Among the many teachers, Yang Changji, who advocated that “heaven, earth, and all things take the self as their master,” had a profound influence on the young Mao Zedong’s ethical thought and worldview. Xiao San once wrote in a memoir: “Yang Changji (courtesy name Huaizhong) had a great influence on Comrade Mao Zedong and many classmates… Comrade Mao Zedong, Comrade Cai Hesen… went to Mr. Yang’s home every Sunday to lecture and seek knowledge.” In a letter to Li Jinxi on June 7, 1920, Mao also wrote: “You and the deceased Mr. Huaizhong are both broad and profound, and I admire you the most.” In 1936, in his conversation with Snow, Mao still remembered Yang Changji’s profound influence on him: “The teacher who impressed me the most was Yang Changji… In my youth, Yang Changji had a deep influence on me, and later in Beijing he became a close friend of mine.” At Hunan First Normal School, Yang Changji mainly served as a moral education teacher, offering courses in pedagogy and ethics. He used the textbook *Principles of Ethics* by the German neo-Kantian philosopher Friedrich Paulsen, influencing the emergence of Mao’s ethical ideas such as “subjective moral law,” “solipsism,” and “spiritual individualism.” In the process of reading *Principles of Ethics*, Mao gained a deeper understanding of the origins of religion and the roots of religious worship, realizing that “the emotion of awe is the source of religion.” In his annotations on *Principles of Ethics*, Mao also criticized traditional ethics, pointing out that “the Three Bonds [2]2 The Three Bonds are the Confucian principles of ruler guiding subject, father guiding son, and husband guiding wife, which were central to traditional Chinese social hierarchy. of our country must be abolished, and the church, the capitalist, the monarch, and the state are all demons of the world.”

1913年,毛泽东进入湖南省立第四师范学校预科就读。次年,第四师范合并于湖南省立第一师范学校。在杨昌济、徐特立、黎锦熙等教员的指导下,毛泽东对哲学、伦理学进行深入研习,并深化自身对于宗教伦理的思考认知。在众多老师中,主张“天地万物,以吾为主”的杨昌济对青年毛泽东的伦理思想与人生观、世界观影响极深。萧三曾撰文回忆:“杨昌济(号怀中)先生对毛泽东同志和许多同学,影响很大……毛泽东同志、蔡和森同志……每逢星期日,就到杨先生的家里去讲学问道。”1920年6月7日,毛泽东致黎锦熙的信中也写道:“先生及死去了的怀中先生,都是弘通广大,最为佩服。”1936年,在与斯诺的谈话中,毛泽东仍不忘杨昌济对自己的深刻影响:“给我印象最深的教员是杨昌济……在我的青年时代杨昌济对我有很深的影响,后来在北京成了我的一位知心朋友。”杨昌济在湖南一师主要担任修身教员,开设了教育学、伦理学等课程。他以德国新康德主义哲学家泡尔生的《伦理学原理》为课本,影响了毛泽东“主观之道德律”“唯我论”“精神之个人主义”等伦理思想的产生。在阅读《伦理学原理》的过程中,毛泽东对宗教起源、宗教崇拜的根源等问题有了更深刻的认识,意识到“寅畏之情,即为宗教之源泉”。在《伦理学原理》批注中,毛泽东也对传统伦理进行批判,指出“吾国之三纲在所必去、而教会、资本家、君主、国家四者,同为天下之恶魔也。”

(2) The Ideological Enlightenment of Modern Newspapers and Periodicals

(二)新式报刊的思想启蒙

During his studies in the provincial capital, Mao Zedong extensively came into contact with a large number of modern newspapers and periodicals, spending nearly “one-third of his living expenses on newspapers.” Through the introduction of Yang Changji, Mao Zedong, Cai Hesen, and others also became enthusiastic readers of *New Youth*. In its inaugural issue, *New Youth* established its purpose as “autonomous, not slavish”; “progressive, not conservative”; “enterprising, not reclusive”; “global, not isolationist”; “practical, not vain”; “scientific, not imaginary.” Regarding its attitude toward religion, the inaugural issue clearly stated “denying religious authority, seeking the liberation of religion,” displaying a magnificent boldness to “re-evaluate all values.” Although, in the sense of fundamental propositions, “religion” and “superstition” are not entirely equivalent, for the needs of critique, the *New Youth* group still juxtaposed “superstition” and “religion” to make way for the needs of “science” and “democracy.” For example, Chen Duxiu, when discussing modern civilization, pointed out: “Religion’s merit lies in rewarding good and persuading to virtue; it is not without benefit to humanity. But its superstition about divine power, obscuring human wisdom, is its shortcoming.” The translated works of the French historian Charles Seignobos, *Modern Civilization History*, which he introduced, also contained sentences such as “People are accustomed only to obeying religion; philosophers call it prejudice and superstition.”

在省城求学期间,毛泽东广泛接触了大量新式报刊,其生活资费近乎“三分之一花在报纸上”。经杨昌济介绍,毛泽东、蔡和森等人还成为《新青年》的热心读者。在发刊词中,《新青年》将自己的宗旨确立为“自主的而非奴隶的”“进步的而非保守的”“进取的而非退隐的”“世界的而非锁国的”“实利的而非虚文的”“科学的而非想象的”;在对宗教的态度上,发刊词旗帜鲜明地指出“否认教权,求宗教之解放也”,展现出“重新估定一切价值”的恢弘胆魄。尽管在元命题意义上,“宗教”与“迷信”并不完全等同,但为了批判的需要,新青年派仍将“迷信”与“宗教”并列,以让位于“科学”与“民主”的需要。如陈独秀在论述近世文明时指出:“宗教指功,胜残劝善,未尝无益于人群。然其迷信神权,蔽塞人智,是所短也。”其所译介的法国史学家薛纽伯的《现代文明史》中也有“世人唯习惯于宗教之是从,哲学者谓为偏见与迷信耳”等语句。

*New Youth* systematically expounded on the inner essence, external manifestations, developmental course, social functions, and negative influences of superstition, advocating the use of the scientific spirit to combat religious mysticism and superstitious coloration, profoundly influencing the worldview and values of young intellectuals such as Mao Zedong. *New Youth*’s principal authors, Chen Duxiu and Hu Shi, “replaced Liang Qichao and Kang Youwei” and became Mao Zedong’s models. Zhou Shizhao recalled that for a long period, Mao Zedong “every day, besides attending class and reading newspapers, read books and read *New Youth*; when talking, talked about *New Youth*; when thinking, also thought about the questions raised in *New Youth*.” Mao Zedong also wrote the article “A Study of Physical Education” under the pen name “Twenty-Eight-Stroke Student,” published in *New Youth* Volume 3, Number 2. At the same time, *The Xiang River Review*, founded by Mao Zedong himself, displayed characteristics in both its editorial format and the topics it addressed that were in the same vein as *New Youth*. Mao Zedong’s anti-superstition thought during the May Fourth period was largely reflected in his articles published in *The Xiang River Review*. Under the influence of *New Youth*, *The Xiang River Review* raised high the banner of “Science and Democracy,” echoing it from afar, becoming “the echo of *New Youth* on the banks of the Xiang River.”

《新青年》对迷信的内在本质、外在表现、发展历程、社会功能及消极影响等问题进行了系统阐述,倡导用科学精神对抗宗教的神秘主义和迷信色彩,深深影响了毛泽东等青年知识分子的世界观和价值观。《新青年》的主要作者陈独秀和胡适“代替了梁启超和康有为”,成为毛泽东的楷模。周世钊回忆道,在很长一段时间内,毛泽东“每天除上课、阅报之外,看书、看《新青年》;谈话、谈《新青年》;思考、也思考《新青年》上所提出的问题”。毛泽东还曾以“二十八画生”为笔名写作《体育之研究》一文,刊载于《新青年》第3卷第2号上。同时,由毛泽东一手创办的《湘江评论》无论是在报刊的编排体例上,还是所涉议题上,均呈现出与新青年同气连枝的特征。毛泽东五四时期的反迷信思想多体现于其刊登在《湘江评论》的文章中。在《新青年》的影响下,《湘江评论》高举“科学与民主”的旗帜,与之遥相呼应,成为《新青年》在“湘江之畔的回声”。

(3) Deepening the Cognition of “Anti-Superstition” through Participation in Learned Societies and Real Political Practice

(三)在参加学会与现实政治实践中深化“反迷信”认知

In April 1918, Mao Zedong, Cai Hesen, He Shuheng, and others initiated the New People’s Study Society in Changsha, with the aim of “renovating scholarship, sharpening moral character, and improving popular customs.” In the correspondence between Mao Zedong and New People’s Study Society members such as Xiao Xudong, Zhou Shizhao, Cai Hesen, and Luo Xuezan, they mostly discussed the actual political situation, socialism, and future prospects, and also criticized the decadent atmosphere of Zhang Jingyao’s “praying to gods and performing séances” and “openly promoting superstition.” In August, to prepare for the New People’s Study Society’s work-study program in France, Mao Zedong left Hunan for the north. Through the introduction of Yang Changji, he took up a post at Peking University Library and frequently participated in activities organized by Li Dazhao to discuss new trends of thought. During his time in Beijing, Mao Zedong also actively participated in the Philosophy Research Society and the Journalism Research Society, extensively studying “the fundamental knowledge of journalism” and broadly absorbing new social ideas such as experimentalism, socialism, and Marxism. In February of the following year, Mao Zedong returned to Hunan and took charge of the affairs of the New People’s Study Society.

1918年4月,毛泽东、蔡和森、何叔衡等在长沙发起新民学会,以“革新学术、砥砺品行、改良人心风俗”为宗旨。在毛泽东与萧旭东、周世钊、蔡和森、罗学瓒等新民学会会员的往来通信中,其多谈论现实政局、社会主义及未来出路等问题,也对张敬尧“求神打酞”“公开提倡迷信”的陈腐风气加以批判。8月,为准备新民学会留法勤工俭学事宜,毛泽东离湘北上,经杨昌济介绍入职北京大学图书馆,并时常参加李大钊组织的研讨新思潮的活动。在北京期间,毛泽东还积极参加了哲学研究会和新闻学研究会,大量学习“新闻学之根本智识”,广泛汲取实验主义、社会主义、马克思主义等社会新思想。次年2月,毛泽东回到湖南,着手主持新民学会会务。

In May, the surging May Fourth Movement promoted the spread of new trends of thought, and the public opinion space in Hunan was renewed. Mao Zedong, together with Deng Zhongxia, Chen Shunong, and others, established the Hunan Student Federation, directing student strikes and anti-imperialist activities. *The Xiang River Review*, as the publication of the Hunan Provincial Student Federation, took “winning freedom from coercive power” as its main purpose, directly targeting its critique at the decadent ideas of “superstition in gods and ghosts, superstition in material phenomena, superstition in fate, and superstition in coercive power.” Under the leadership of the Student Federation, students from various schools in Changsha successively published more than ten kinds of publications, such as *New Hunan*, *The Bell of Women’s World*, *Yuelu Weekly*, *Mingde Weekly*, and *Changjun Journal*, to propagate new culture and lead new trends of thought. Xiao San recalled: “In a short period, the thinking of student youth and intellectual youth throughout the province (and not only Hunan Province) was completely renewed.”

5月,狂飙骤起的五四运动推动了新思潮的传播,湖南舆论空间一新。毛泽东与邓中夏、陈书农等一同成立了湖南学生联合会,指挥学生罢课与反帝活动。《湘江评论》作为湖南省学联刊物,以“由强权得自由”为要旨,将批判的矛头直指“迷信神鬼,迷信物象,迷信运命,迷信强权”的陈腐思想。在学联的引领下,长沙各校学生陆续出版了《新湖南》《女界钟》《岳麓周刊》《明德周刊》《长郡书刊》等十余种刊物以宣传新文化、引领新思潮。萧三回忆道:“短期内全省(不仅湖南省)学生青年、知识青年的思想,焕然一新。”

On November 14, 1919, the Changsha bride Zhao Wuzhen, in opposition to arranged marriage, committed suicide in her bridal sedan chair, causing a public uproar. At this time, *The Xiang River Review* had already been banned by Zhang Jingyao. Mao Zedong was then serving as an “off-staff writer” for the Changsha *Ta Kung Pao* and successively wrote articles such as “Critique of Miss Zhao’s Suicide,” “The Question of Miss Zhao’s Personality,” “The Question of Reforming the Marriage System,” “Against Suicide,” and “The Question of Superstition in Marriage,” published in *Ta Kung Pao*. In these articles, Mao Zedong’s cognition of the question of superstition deepened, and he saw the complex social roots behind superstition, pointing out that Zhao’s death was the result of oppression by “three iron nets (society, her maternal family, and her husband’s family).” He hoped, through criticizing traditional marriage customs and ethics, to “concentrate attacks on feudal rites and China’s evil society.” He incorporated the critique of superstition into an examination of feudal rites and social oppression, and in practice explored a realistic path for reforming social thought.

1919年11月14日,长沙新娘赵五贞为反对包办婚姻自勿于花轿中,引起舆论震动。此时,《湘江评论》已遭张敬尧查封。毛泽东时任长沙《大公报》“馆外撰述员”,相继撰写了《对于赵女士自杀的批评》《赵女士的人格问题》《改革婚制问题》《非自杀》《婚姻上的迷信问题》等文章刊载在《大公报》上。在这些文章中,毛泽东对迷信问题的认知更加深入,并看到了迷信背后复杂的社会根源,指出赵的死亡是“三面铁网(社会、母家、夫家)”压迫的结果,希望通过批判传统婚俗伦理来“集中抨击封建礼教和中国的万恶社会”。他将对迷信的批判纳入到对封建礼教和社会压迫的审视之中,更在实践中探索出一条革新社会思想的现实路径。

2. Science and Democracy: The Formative Path of Mao Zedong’s Anti-Superstition Thought during the May Fourth Period

二、科学与民主:五四时期毛泽东反迷信思想的形成路径

During the May Fourth period, in the realistic context of national crisis, Chinese society was in a critical period of horizontal self-examination using the West as a mirror and vertical transformation toward modernization. In September 1915, Chen Duxiu, in the inaugural issue of *Youth Magazine*, loudly called out: “If our countrymen wish to escape the age of ignorance and be ashamed of being shallow people, then they must urgently catch up and should value science and human rights equally.” From this, *New Youth*, with the force of breaking through a net, raised high the banner of “Science” and “Democracy,” setting off a wave of support for “Mr. Democracy” and “Mr. Science” across the country.

五四时期,在民族危亡的现实语境下,中国社会正处于横向上以西方为镜鉴、纵向上向现代化转型的关键时期。1915年9月,陈独秀在《青年杂志》发刊词中高声疾呼:“国人而欲脱蒙昧时代,羞为浅化之民也,则急起直追,当以科学与人权并重。”由此,《新青年》以冲决罗网之势高举“科学”与“民主”的旗帜,在全国各地掀起拥护“德先生”与“赛先生”的热潮。

Immersed in the discourse of the May Fourth period, the enlightenment narrative of “Science” and “Democracy” became Mao Zedong’s main mode of thinking and way of thinking during the May Fourth period. The superstitious ideas Mao Zedong criticized during the May Fourth period mainly manifested in four forms: first, traditional superstitions left over from feudal society; second, superstition in feudal old morality and ethical concepts; third, blind faith in ideological authority; fourth, blind obedience to feudal monarchical power and autocratic systems. “Using science to oppose ignorance” and “using democracy to oppose authority” constituted the important thinking path through which Mao Zedong understood the harm of “superstition.”

在五四话语的浸润下,“科学”与“民主”的启蒙叙事成为毛泽东在五四时期主要的思维模式与思考方式。五四时期毛泽东所批判的迷信思想主要表现为四种形式:其一,封建社会遗留的传统迷信;其二,对封建旧道德及伦理观念的迷信;其三,盲目信仰思想权威;其四,盲从封建君权与专制制度。“以科学反对愚昧”“以民主反对权威”构成毛泽东认知“迷信”危害的重要思维路径。

(1) Using Science to Oppose Ignorance

(一)以科学反对愚昧

Examining the frequency with which modern intellectual circles discussed “superstition” reveals roughly two peaks: one between 1902 and 1905, and another between 1915 and 1921. Throughout this process, “science” was often juxtaposed with “superstition,” and their frequencies of use were highly correlated. In the anti-superstition discourse of the late Qing period, “superstition” was mostly associated with “religious belief.” In 1902, Liang Qichao, in his article “Preserving the Teachings Is Not the Way to Respect Confucius,” pointed out: “What Westerners call religion refers specifically to superstitious belief and reverence… Those who initiate belief prohibit people from doubting and stifle freedom of thought.” Subsequently, the article “On Belief” by Japanese scholar Fujikawa Yu, published in *The New Citizen*, further regarded “superstition” as a state of belief contrary to rationalism: “Superstition often found in religious belief arises from errors in knowledge and mistakes in imagination. We recognize that many things violate natural laws, so superstition is non-rational.”

对近代知识界谈论“迷信”的频次进行考察,大致呈现两个高峰:一为1902至1905之间,另一为1915年至1921年。在整个过程中,“科学”常与“迷信”对举,两者在使用频率上呈现高度相关。在清末的反迷信话语中,“迷信”多与“宗教信仰”相关联。1902年,梁启超在《保教非所以尊孔论》中指出:“西人所谓宗教者,专指迷信宗仰而言……起信者,禁人之怀疑,窒人思想自由也。”其后,《新民丛报》刊载的日本学者富士川游《论信仰》一文进一步将“迷信”视作违背理性主义的信仰状态:“宗教上信仰常有之迷信者,由知得之误谬与想像之错误而起。吾人明认背于自然律者多,故迷信者,非理性的也。”

With the rise of the New Culture Movement, the juxtaposition of “science” and “superstition” became increasingly pronounced. From the perspective of science, superstition, as a relic of the old era, stood in opposition to the former and became an important target of universal condemnation by the intellectual world. For example, in *New Youth* Volume 6, Number 2, Liu Shuya’s translation of the German philosopher Ernst Haeckel’s “On the Supernatural” clearly stated that science and superstition are absolutely incompatible: “This superstitious belief in the supernatural is still widely spread, and its prevalence exceeds all expectation. In my view, superstition and irrationality are the great enemies of humanity; science and reason are humanity’s true friends.” At this time, the connotations and denotations of both “science” and “superstition” had expanded. The former mainly referred to “branch learning (social sciences), practical technology, opposition to superstition, and Marxism-Leninism,” while the latter was specifically manifested as “blind faith and worship,” closely related to politics, Confucianism, and Chinese tradition. *New Youth*’s discourse of using science to oppose superstition took three forms. First, religious superstition obscures the people’s wisdom and hinders civilizational progress; science should replace superstition: “For Judaism, for India, the great source of their weakness lies in religious superstition as an obstacle to their civilizational progress,” and “Humanity’s future true understanding, belief, practice, and realization must take science as the correct path; all religions are to be discarded.” Second, the theory of spiritualism and ghosts and gods recklessly discusses spiritualism and tramples on science; science should be used to explain it: “It must be based on science, it must be based on rigorous science; what is produced by ‘indulging in metaphysical speculation’ is not welcomed by current philosophy either.” Third, the superstition of Confucianism is essentially a manifestation of feudal autocracy; it should be resisted with the spirit of scientific rationality: “Our belief in science is that it is the correct path for future humanity to achieve enlightenment and enjoy happiness, and it is especially urgently needed in our country at present. The respect it deserves should naturally be above that of Confucianism, the Confucian Way, and other religions and philosophies.”

伴随着新文化运动兴起,“科学”与“迷信”的对举愈发彰显。在科学视域下,迷信作为旧时代的遗留物,与前者对立,成为知识界口诛笔伐的重要批判对象。如《新青年》第六卷第二号中,刘叔雅翻译的德国哲学家赫克尔的《灵异论》中便明确提出科学与迷信绝不相容:“这灵异的迷信,依然是流播很广,其盛行竟出人意想之外。据我看起来,迷信和非理是人类的大敌,科学和理性是人类的挚友。”此时“科学”与“迷信”的内涵和外延均有所扩展,前者主要指涉“分科之学(社会科学)、实用技术、反对迷信和马列主义”,后者则具体表现为“盲目的信仰崇拜”,与政治、儒学与中国传统密切相关。《新青年》以科学反对迷信的话语呈现三种形式。其一,宗教迷信蔽塞民智,阻碍文明进步,应以科学取代迷信:“若犹太,若印度,其衰弱之大原,无不以宗教迷信,为其文明改进之障碍”,“人类将来真实之信解行证,必以科学为正轨,一切宗教皆在废弃之列”。其二,灵学鬼神之说妄议灵学、践踏科学,应以科学加以解释:“一定要以科学为根据,一定要以严密的科学为根据;‘逞其玄想’所造成的,也不是现在哲学所欢迎的。”其三,孔教迷信实质是封建专制的体现,应以科学理性精神加以反抗:“余辈对于科学之信仰,以为将来人类达于觉悟获享幸福,必由之正轨尤为吾国目前所急需。其应提倡尊重之也,当然在孔教孔道及其他宗教哲学之上。”

The May Fourth period’s paradigm of “using science to oppose superstition” profoundly shaped Mao Zedong’s mode of thinking on the issue of anti-superstition. Within the discourse of “using science to oppose superstition,” Mao believed that no matter the form in which superstitious ideas appeared, their root lay in the people’s cognitive ignorance and lack of knowledge about the world, and that they should be eradicated through scientific knowledge and the scientific spirit.

五四时期“以科学反对迷信”的思维范式深刻影响了毛泽东对于反迷信问题的思考模式。在“以科学反对迷信”的话语中,毛泽东认为,无论迷信思想以何种形式呈现,其根源都在于民众认知的愚昧和对世界的无知,应以科学知识、科学精神加以破除。

Many superstitious ideas manifested as the people’s misunderstanding of natural and social phenomena, the root of which lay in the people’s lack of scientific knowledge. On June 11, 1919, Chen Duxiu was arrested and imprisoned for supporting the May Fourth Movement, sparking widespread public indignation. The following month, on the 14th, Mao Zedong published the article “Chen Duxiu’s Arrest and Rescue” to express solidarity with Chen Duxiu. In this article, Mao analyzed the turbulent social situation, pointing out: “Of China’s four hundred million people, nearly three hundred and ninety million are superstitious. They are superstitious about ghosts and gods, superstitious about physical objects and phenomena, superstitious about fate, superstitious about power. They completely fail to recognize the individual, fail to recognize themselves, fail to recognize truth. This is the result of the underdevelopment of scientific thought.” On the one hand, the people’s superstition about ghosts and gods, physical objects and phenomena, and fate often manifested as explaining events such as illness and natural disasters through the will of spirits and gods, rooted in a lack of scientific knowledge. For example, on July 28, 1919, Mao Zedong published “Those Who Do Not Believe in Science Will Die” in the *Xiang River Review*, commenting on the social incident in Changsha city where lightning killed several people and the ensuing public opinion. In the article, Mao criticized the superstitious idea among the people that attributed the lightning deaths to “five hundred thunderbolts of wrath, a punishment sent down from heaven.” He pointed out that the incident occurred mainly because “the city’s streets and ditches were filthy, with an abundance of electrical charge… old trees carry much electricity, and one should not build houses beneath them”; the solution was not to pray to gods and Buddhas but to adopt practical measures such as “building high towers and installing several lightning rods.” On the other hand, the people’s lack of scientific cognition and their blind following of authority were largely due to the monopoly of educational and knowledge resources by the class of power. This phenomenon largely fostered the people’s psychology of blind obedience and blind faith. As Mao pointed out: “Originally, the Chinese nation, hundreds of millions of people, for thousands of years, had all lived the life of slaves, with only one non-slave being the ‘emperor’ (or it could be said that the emperor was also a slave of ‘heaven’). In the days when the emperor was in charge, we were not allowed to practice our abilities. In politics, academia, society, and so on, we were not allowed to have thoughts, to have organization, or to have practice.”

许多迷信思想呈现为民众对自然与社会现象的误解,根源在于民众科学知识的匮乏。1919年6月11日,陈独秀因支持五四运动而被捕入狱,引发社会群情激奋。次月14日,毛泽东发表了《陈独秀之被捕及营救》一文,以声援陈独秀。在该文中,毛泽东对动荡不安的社会现状进行分析,指出:“中国的四万万人,差不多有三万九千万是迷信家。迷信鬼神,迷信物象,迷信运命,迷信强权。全然不认有个人,不认有自己,不认有真理。这是科学思想不发达的结果。”一方面,民众对鬼神、物象、运命的迷信常表现为以神灵命运解释疾病、自然灾害等事件,根源于科学知识的匮乏。如1919年7月28日,毛泽东在《湘江评论》上发表《不信科学便死》,针对长沙城雷电触死多人的社会事件及社会舆论进行评论。在文章中,毛泽东批判了民众将雷电触死现象归因为“五百蛮雷,上天降罚”的迷信思想。指出事件的发生主要是由于“城里街渠污秽,电气独多……老树电多,不宜在他的下面筑屋”,解决的办法并非求神拜佛而应采取“建高塔,设避雷针数处”的现实手段。另一方面,民众缺乏科学认知,盲目追随权威,很大程度上是因为教育和知识资源被强权阶级垄断。这种现象在很大程度上促成了民众盲从、盲信的迷信心理。如毛泽东指出:“原来中华民族,几万万人,从几千年来,都是干着奴隶的生活,只有一个非奴隶的是“皇帝”(或曰皇帝也是“天”的奴隶)。皇帝当家的时候,是不准我们练习能力的。政治,学术,社会,等等,都是不准我们有思想,有组织,有练习的。”

When science first entered China in the guise of “the utility of tools and things” (格物致知), by the May Fourth period, the Chinese people had come to realize that science was not only the scientific knowledge and technology of the physical realm but also the scientific spirit of the metaphysical realm. At the level of the scientific spirit, Mao Zedong particularly emphasized truth-seeking and criticalness. On the one hand, one should adhere to an attitude of seeking truth and replace blind acceptance with rational thought. In his annotations on *The Principles of Ethics*, Mao criticized the people’s psychology of blind obedience, of submitting to authority without discrimination, believing that “some people’s claim that moral law must be derived from the command of gods before it can be practiced without being discarded—this is the psychology of slaves.” On July 21, 1919, Mao published “The Establishment and Progress of the Society for the Promotion of Learning,” which even more clearly criticized the phenomenon of blind thought: “The thought of that time was empty thought… following the crowd became the fashion, and once it entered the realm of thought, it was not easy to lead people into actually studying practical matters and truth.” On the other hand, one should use the critical spirit of questioning tradition to strengthen the courage to break free from the bonds of superstition and challenge authority. The reason the people were superstitious about feudal morality, ethics, and monarchical autocracy was largely because they had been indoctrinated with these concepts from childhood, lacking the ability to reflect and criticize. As Mao pointed out in “The Establishment and Progress of the Society for the Promotion of Learning”: “We live in this complex society and treacherous world; without a spirit of criticism, it is easy to become slaves of others. A certain gentleman said that the majority of Chinese people are slaves; this remark is indeed not wrong.” Due to a lack of free will and critical spirit, the people often fell into a passive and submissive mindset, finding it difficult to consciously recognize this state or to stimulate the will to change, ultimately becoming appendages of power.

科学最初以格物致知的“器物之用”面目传入中国,到了五四时期,国人已认识到,科学不只是形而下的科学知识、科学技术,而且也有形而上的科学精神。在科学精神层面,毛泽东尤其强调求真性与批判性。一方面,应坚持探求真理的态度,以理性思考代替盲从接纳。在《伦理学原理》批注中,毛泽东对民众不加辨别、屈从权威的盲从心理加以批判,认为“或人之说,必以道德律为出于神之命令,而后能实行而不唾弃,此奴隶之心理也。”1919年7月21日,毛泽东发表《健学会之成立及进行》一文,更是旗帜鲜明地批判思想盲从的现象:“那时候的思想,是空虚的思想……凑热闹成了风,人人思想界,便不容易引入实际去研究实事和真理了。”另一方面,应以质疑传统的批判精神,增强打破迷信束缚、挑战权威的勇气。民众之所以迷信封建道德、伦理和君权专制,很大程度上是因为他们从小就被灌输了这些观念,缺乏反思与批判的能力。如毛泽东在《健学会之成立及进行》中指出:“我们住在这繁复的社会,诡诈的世界,没有批评的精神,就容易做他人的奴隶。某君谓中国人大半是奴隶,这话殊觉不错。”因缺乏自由意志与批判精神,民众往往陷入一种被动和顺从的心态,难以自觉地意识到这种状态,也难以激发出变革的意愿,而最终沦为强权的附庸。

(2) Using Democracy to Oppose Authority

(二)以民主反对权威

The defeat in the First Sino-Japanese War (1894–1895) plunged the nation into a crisis of survival, suddenly awakening “our country from its slumber of more than four thousand years.” The Qing dynasty, which had once prided itself as the “Celestial Empire,” had fallen behind the Western powers. In this precarious situation, the enlightened and awakened began to reflect on the shortcomings of the national system, and intellectuals, shouldering the heavy responsibility of national salvation, started searching for a path of change. In this reflection, thinkers of the Hundred Days’ Reform period, such as Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao, deeply felt the rigidity and obsolescence of China’s traditional system when comparing Chinese and Western systems. They continuously called for institutional change, and Western democratic thought gradually spread throughout China. At that time, democratic thought mainly referred to the idea of civil rights and the spirit of Western constitutionalism, directly opposing the political system of feudal autocracy. For example, Liang Qichao, in his “Study of Rousseau’s Case,” summarized Rousseau’s theory of sovereignty as: “Its power should belong only to the multitude, and cannot belong to one person or a few; in other words, the sovereign is the property of the state. The state is the property of the multitude,” advocating that national sovereignty belongs to the people. In August 1898, Kang Youwei also submitted a memorial to the Qing emperor, “A Memorial Requesting the Establishment of a Constitution and the Opening of a National Assembly,” stating: “Learning from the examples of Yao, Shun, and the Three Dynasties above, and drawing from the strong nations of East and West externally, immediately establish a constitution, open a national assembly, share all government affairs with the people, and implement a system of separation of powers; then China’s governance and strength can be achieved in a calculable number of days,” advocating replacing the autocratic system with a system of separation of powers.

甲午战败,民族存亡危机四伏,一时唤醒“吾国四千余年大梦”。曾经自诩为“天朝上国”的大清,已然落后于西方列强。在岌岌可危的局势之下,先知先觉者纷纷反思国家体制的弊端,知识分子肩负救亡图存的重任,开始寻找变革之路。在这一反思中,康有为、梁启超等戊戌时期的思想家,在对比中西方体制时,深切感受到中国传统体制的僵化与陈旧。他们不断呼吁制度变革,西方民主主义思潮也随之在中国不断蔓延。此时的民主思潮主要指涉民权思想与西方宪政精神,与封建专制的政治体制直接对立。如梁启超在《卢梭学案》中将卢梭主权思想归纳为:“其权惟当属之众人,而不能属之一人若数人,质言之,则主权者,邦国之所有。邦国者,众人之所有”,主张国家主权归人民所有。1898年8月,康有为也在《请定立宪开国会折》中上书清帝:“上师尧、舜、三代,外采东西强国,立行宪法,大开国会,以庶政与国民共之,行三权鼎立之制,则中国之治强,可计日待也”,以三权分立之制代替专制体制。

By the May Fourth New Culture period, under the guidance of progressive journals such as *New Youth*, democratic thought spread further, its connotations deepened, and its targets of criticism expanded from the political system criticized during the Hundred Days’ Reform and Xinhai Revolution periods to the realm of the people’s thought and spirit. Traditional ideas such as Confucian teachings, ritual codes, and old ethics became the focus of criticism and were severely attacked. For example, in early 1919, Chen Duxiu, in his “Reply to the Charges against This Magazine,” responded to the accusations that *New Youth* had faced in recent years, such as “heresy, monstrosity, heterodoxy against the classics and the Way, and rebellion against the sages and the law,” pointing out: “Tracing back to the source, the colleagues of this magazine were originally innocent; it was only because we supported Mr. Democracy and Mr. Science that we committed these heinous crimes. To support Mr. Democracy, we had to oppose Confucian teachings, ritual codes, chastity, old ethics, and old politics. To support Mr. Science, we had to oppose old art and old religion.”

至五四新文化时期,在《新青年》等进步期刊的引领下,民主思潮进一步传播,其内涵日渐深化,批判对象也由戊戌、辛亥时期的政治体制扩展至国民的思想精神领域。孔教、礼法、旧伦理等传统思想成为批评的焦点,受到了严厉的抨击。如1919年年初,陈独秀在《本志罪案之答辩书》中就对《新青年》近年来所遭受的“邪说、怪物、离经叛道的异端、非圣无法的叛逆”等诘问作出回应,指出:“追本溯源,本志同人本来无罪,只因为拥护那德莫克拉西(Democracy)和赛因斯(science)两位先生,才犯了这几条滔天的大罪。要拥护那德先生,便不得不反对孔教、礼法、贞节、旧伦理、旧政治。要拥护那赛先生,便不得不反对旧艺术、旧宗教。”

Including Confucian teachings, ritual codes, and old ethics within the category of “superstition” was a core value orientation of *New Youth*, which profoundly influenced Mao Zedong’s ideological cognition. In Mao Zedong’s anti-superstition discourse during the May Fourth period, he raised high the banner of “democracy,” and his critical edge was aimed directly at those ideological authorities that contradicted the spirit of modern democracy, as well as those political authorities that violated the principles of democratic republicanism and constitutionalism.

将孔教、礼法、旧伦理纳入“迷信”的范畴是《新青年》的核心价值指向,这对毛泽东的思想认知产生了深刻影响。在毛泽东五四时期的“反迷信”话语中,他高举“民主”旗帜,其批判的锋芒直指那些与现代民主精神相悖的思想权威,及与民主共和宪政原则相违背的政治权威。

On the one hand, the rulers, by means of feudal ethical morality, deprived the people of their free will and fettered the space for the lower-class masses to “think and criticize,” which was in essence an ideological tyranny contrary to the spirit of modern democracy. During the May Fourth period, under the advocacy of Chen Duxiu, Li Dazhao, and others who “attacked Confucius as the idolized authority sculpted by successive monarchs,”[14]14 The May Fourth Movement (1919) was an anti-imperialist, anti-feudal cultural and political movement led by intellectuals, which promoted science, democracy, and the critique of Confucianism. Mao Zedong directed his critique directly at the feudal ethical code that upheld the feudal autocratic order, regarding it as “ideological tyranny.” He considered the ideological authority centered on “Confucian teaching” to have fettered the free will of the masses and violated the principle of freedom inherent in the spirit of modern democracy. For instance, in his commentary on the suicide of Zhao Wuzhen,[15]15 Zhao Wuzhen was a young woman in Changsha who committed suicide in 1919 to protest an arranged marriage, sparking public debate on feudal ethics. Mao analyzed the differences between Chinese and Western family structures, pointing out that, in contrast to Western parents’ recognition of their children’s free will, “in China it is otherwise: the commands of parents and the will of children are completely incompatible.” In “The Formation and Progress of the Jianhui Study Society,”[16]16 The Jianhui Study Society was a progressive academic organization founded in Changsha in 1919, advocating for freedom of thought and social reform. he stated even more unequivocally: “We oppose Confucius for many other reasons. The mere fact that he has monopolized China and prevented our intellectual circles from being free, making us slavish idolators for two thousand years, is reason enough to oppose him.” Subsequently, in “The Great Union of the Popular Masses,”[17]17 “The Great Union of the Popular Masses” is an essay by Mao Zedong published in 1919, calling for the unity of workers, peasants, and other groups to challenge oppressive structures. he further criticized the fettering of the masses by ideological tyranny: “Our teachers of Chinese classics are so stubborn. Their mouths are full of ‘the Book of Odes says’ and ‘the Master says’… a whole heap of classical, corpse-like, rotten essays, forced into our brains.” The compliance of the general public with the feudal ethics represented by Confucianism was a benighted, superficial idolatry. This superstition violated the modern Enlightenment principle of individual freedom and independent thought, hindering the generation and development of the people’s free will.

一方面,统治者借助封建伦理道德剥夺民众的自由意志,桎梏了下层民众“思考-批判”的空间,实质是与现代民主精神相悖的思想强权。五四时期,在陈独秀、李大钊等人“掊击孔子为历代君主所雕塑之偶像权威”的主张下,毛泽东将批判的矛头直指维护封建专制秩序的封建伦理纲常,将其视作“思想的强权”,认为以“孔教”为主的思想权威桎梏了民众自由意志,违背了现代民主精神的自由原则。如在评论赵五贞自杀事件时,毛泽东剖析了中西家庭组织的差异,指出,与西方父母承认子女的自由意志相较,“中国则不然,父母的命令,和子女的意志完全不相并立”。在《健学会之成立及进行》中,他更是旗帜鲜明地指出:“我们反对孔子,有很多别的理由。单这独霸中国,使我们思想界不能自由,郁郁做二千年偶像的奴隶,也是不能不反对的。”随后又在《民众的大联合》中进一步批判思想强权对民众的桎梏:“我们的国文先生那么顽固。满嘴里,诗云9,子曰9……一大堆古典式死尸式的臭文章,迫着向我们脑子里灌。”社会大众对以儒家思想为代表的封建伦理的遵从是蒙昧、肤浅的偶像迷信,这种迷信违背了个体自由、独立思考的现代性启蒙法则,阻碍了民众自由意志的生成与发展。

On the other hand, within the radical discourse of the May Fourth period, feudal ethics, as an ideological tyranny, had degenerated into an appendage of the autocratic system, merging with political tyranny to become a tangible, real political oppression, contrary to the constitutional principle of democratic republicanism. For Chinese society around the time of the May Fourth Movement, although the feudal dynasty had been overthrown by the Xinhai Revolution,[18]18 The Xinhai Revolution (1911) overthrew the Qing dynasty and established the Republic of China, ending two thousand years of imperial rule. the countercurrent of revering Confucius and restoring the old order continued unabated. The years of warlord warfare and authoritarian rule by the Northern Warlords,[19]19 The Northern Warlords were military factions that controlled northern China after the 1911 Revolution, engaging in constant civil wars and authoritarian rule. combined with traditional feudal ethical codes, further intensified the ideological shackling and real oppression of the masses, seriously hindering political innovation and transformation. As Chen Duxiu put it: “According to Confucius’s ethical and political theories, a monarch is indispensable; thus, before Yuan Shikai[20]20 Yuan Shikai was a military strongman who served as the first president of the Republic of China and briefly declared himself emperor in 1915-1916. wanted to become emperor, he promoted the veneration of Confucius.” Mao Zedong also pointed out that China at that time was “republican in name but autocratic in reality, getting worse and worse, with one falling and another taking his place. This is because the masses have no shadow of democracy in their hearts and do not know what democracy really is.” Classifying ideological authority and political authority under the category of “superstition” and fundamentally criticizing them marked a new breakthrough in Mao’s critique of superstition. In this process, the old ethics centered on the Three Bonds and Five Constant Virtues[21]21 The Three Bonds and Five Constant Virtues are core Confucian ethical principles: the Three Bonds (ruler-subject, father-son, husband-wife) and the Five Constant Virtues (benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, fidelity). were regarded as a “value system of ethical morality, patriarchal lineage, and political symbolism” that maintained the feudal monarchy. Contrary to the spirit of “democracy,” they degenerated into an appendage of autocratic politics. For example, in his commentary on Zhao Wuzhen’s suicide, Mao directed his critique directly at the political authority behind ideological superstition. Analyzing the reasons for Zhao Wuzhen’s suicide, he stated: “A person’s suicide is entirely determined by the environment… The fact that Ms. Zhao sought death was because the environment forced her to seek it.” He further elaborated: “Now that Ms. Zhao is truly dead, it was because she was tightly surrounded by a three-sided iron net (society, her maternal family, and her husband’s family), unable to live, and thus driven to death.” Zhao Wuzhen’s death was not without cause; it was a direct result of the feudal autocratic social environment: “I say there are three parties that forced Ms. Zhao to her death: first, her maternal family; second, her husband’s family; third, society… The maternal family and the husband’s family are both members of society. We must understand that the maternal family and the husband’s family are guilty, but the source of their guilt still lies in society.”

另一方面,在五四激进话语中,封建伦理作为思想强权已沦为专制制度的附庸,与政治强权合流,成为一种切身的、现实的政治压迫,与民主共和的宪政原则相悖。对五四前后的中国社会而言,尽管封建王朝已被辛亥革命推翻,但尊孔复古的逆流仍持续上演。北洋军阀的连年混战与威权统治同传统封建伦理纲常合流,进一步加剧了对民众的思想束缚和现实压迫,严重阻碍了政治的革新和转型。如陈独秀所言:“照孔圣人的伦理学说,政治学说,都非立君不可;所以袁世凯要做皇帝之先,便提倡尊孔。”毛泽东也指出,那时的中国“名为共和,实则专制,愈弄愈槽(糟),甲仆乙代,这是群众心里没有民主的影子,不晓得民主究竟是甚么的结果”。将思想权威与政治权威归入“迷信”范畴,并从根本上对其进行批判,标志着毛泽东在迷信批判上的一次新的突破。在这一过程中,以三纲五常为核心的旧伦理被视作维系封建帝制的“伦理道德、宗法血缘、政治象征的价值系统”,与“民主”精神相悖,沦为专制政治的附庸。如在对赵五贞自杀一事的评论中,毛泽东将批判的矛头直指思想迷信背后的政治权威。他在分析赵五贞自杀的原因时指出:“一个人的自杀,完全是由环境决定的……赵女士而竟求死了,是环境逼着他求死的。”他进一步阐述:“如今赵女士真死了,是三面铁网(社会、母家、夫家)坚重围着,求生不能,至于求死的。”赵五贞的死并非无缘无故,而是封建专制社会环境下的直接结果:“我说逼赵女士致死的有三方面:一是母家,一是夫家,一是社会……母家、夫家,都是社会的一个分子。我们要晓得母家、夫家是有罪恶,但是他罪恶的来源仍在社会。”

III. Reshaping the Self and Transforming the Citizenry: The Historical Mission of Anti-Superstition Discourse

三、重塑自我与改造国民:反迷信话语的历史使命

In the historical context of modern national crisis, seeking the modernization and transformation of the country became an important path for national salvation and survival. From the perspective of the May Fourth intellectual circles, superstitious thought hindered the country’s modernization process and had to be criticized and discarded. Mao Zedong, with a profound insight into the historical currents and the general trend of the times, gradually established his own system of anti-superstition discourse. He advocated vigorously promoting education to clear away benightedness, advancing a revolution in philosophy and ethics, and transforming the people’s thinking. At the same time, he strongly championed individual value and free will, encouraging the masses to unite and resist tyranny. These measures were closely tied to the core goals of “reshaping the self” and “transforming the citizenry,” providing dual support—both ideological and practical—for the country’s modernization and transformation.

在近代民族危机的历史语境下,寻求国家的现代化转型成为救亡图存的重要途径。在五四知识界的视域中,迷信思想阻碍了国家的现代化进程,必须予以批判和摒弃。毛泽东深刻洞察历史潮流和时代大势,逐步建立了自己的反迷信话语体系。他主张大力兴办教育,廓清蒙昧,推动哲学伦理革命,变换国民思想。同时,他极力倡导个人价值与自由意志,鼓励民众联合起来反抗强权。这些举措紧扣“重塑自我”与“改造国民”的核心目标,为国家现代化转型提供了思想与行动上的双重支撑。

First, vigorously developing education. Mao Zedong had a profound insight that the lack of education was an important cause of the masses’ superstition and benightedness. In Chinese society at that time, education was controlled by bureaucrats, aristocrats, and capitalists, and ordinary people lacked the right to receive an education, thus giving rise to the class distinction of “intellectual division between the wise and the ignorant.” As Mao Zedong pointed out in his article “Chen Duxiu’s Arrest and Rescue”: “In the past, education was the monopoly of the aristocracy and capitalists; ordinary people had absolutely no opportunity to receive it. Since they alone possessed knowledge, classes of the wise and the ignorant emerged.” On November 25, 1920, Mao Zedong wrote a letter to Xiang Jingyu,[22]22 Xiang Jingyu (1895-1928) was a prominent early Chinese communist and women’s rights activist, later executed by the Kuomintang. in which he mentioned that “education has not been implemented, the people’s wisdom has not been awakened, and most of the people of Hunan are still in a dreamlike slumber,” revealing his deep concern and emotion. Faced with this situation, Mao Zedong advocated using education to clear away benightedness and using education to transform the citizenry: “Observation of the world situation, the implementation of democracy, the dissemination of culture, and the reform of education are tasks that brook no delay.” On September 1, 1919, Mao Zedong wrote a letter to Deng Zhongxia,[23]23 Deng Zhongxia (1894-1933) was a Chinese communist labor movement leader and early member of the CPC. enclosing more than ten copies of the “Charter of the Problem Study Society,” which listed over seventy problems requiring urgent study. Among them, the “education problem” was placed first, fully demonstrating his high regard and deep concern for education. Based on this understanding of using education to clear away benightedness, Mao Zedong vigorously devoted himself to the practical exploration of developing education during the May Fourth period. He advocated that “education should be universalized so that the people may all possess knowledge,” and established schools to implement extensive, universal education for the common people, thereby enabling “thirty million people to have the freedom of speech, publication, assembly, and association.” In September 1917, Mao Zedong initiated the organization of the Xiangtan Alumni Association of the First Normal School, whose primary purpose was “to seek the development of education in Xiangtan.” The following month, in his capacity as the General Affairs Officer and Director of the Education Research Department of the First Normal School Student Association, he actively organized the Workers’ Night School at the school, thereby enhancing the cultural literacy of the masses and changing social customs. In addition, Mao Zedong actively promoted the Jianhui Study Society and the Xiangtan Education Promotion Association, founded the Cultural Book Society to introduce the latest Chinese and foreign books, newspapers, and magazines, and simultaneously relied on publications such as the *Xiangjiang Review* and *New Hunan* to widely disseminate new ideas, striving to enlighten the people, awaken the masses, and set off a wave of social change.

其一,大力发展教育。毛泽东深刻洞察到,教育的缺失是导致民众迷信与蒙昧的重要原因。彼时的中国社会,教育为官僚、贵族与资本家把控,平民缺乏受教育的权利,于是产生了“智愚分化”的阶级差异。如毛泽东在《陈独秀之被捕及营救中》一文所指出:“从前的教育,是贵族和资本家的专利,一般平民,绝没有机会去受得。他们既独有知识,于是生出了智愚的阶级。”1920年11月25日,毛泽东致信向警予,信中谈及“教育未行,民智未启,多数之湘人,犹在睡梦”,字里行间不乏忧思与感慨。面对如此现状,毛泽东倡导,应以教育廓清蒙昧,以教育改造国民:“世界大势之观察,民治之敷施,文化之宣传,教育之改造,刻不容缓也。”1919年9月1日,毛泽东致信邓中夏,附上《问题研究会章程》十余张,列出当前亟需研究的七十余个问题,其中“教育问题”被置于首位,足见其对教育的高度重视与深刻关切。在以教育廓清蒙昧的认知下,毛泽东在五四时期大力投身于发展教育的实践探索之中,主张“教育普及使人民咸有知识始”而兴办学校,施行广泛的、普及的平民教育,从而使“三千万人都有言论、出版、集会、结社之自由”。1917年9月,毛泽东发起组织第一师范湘潭校友会,首要宗旨便是“谋发展湘潭教育”。次月,毛泽东又以湖南一师学友会总务兼教育研究部部长的身份,积极筹办一师工人夜学,借此提升大众文化素养,改变社会风气。此外,毛泽东还积极推动健学会与湘潭教育促进会,创办文化书社,介绍中外最新书报杂志;同时依托《湘江评论》《新湖南》等刊物,广泛传播新思想,力求开启民智、唤醒民众,掀起社会变革的风潮。

Second, carrying out a revolution in philosophy and ethics. On 23 August 1917, in a long letter to Li Jinxi, Mao Zedong wrote: “In the past I was ignorant; recently I have read a few books and newspapers and made a rough comparison of affairs at home and abroad. I feel that the accumulated ills of our countrymen are very deep, their thinking too old, their morality too corrupt. Thinking governs people’s minds, morality regulates people’s conduct; if these two are not clean, the whole land is defiled. The power of these two things pervades everywhere. Thought and morality must be true and real. The thought and morality of our country can be summed up in two phrases: false and not true, empty and not real. Handed down for five thousand years to the present day, their roots are very deep, their knots very firm; without great force it is not easy to uproot and clear them away.” [24]24 The letter to Li Jinxi of 23 August 1917 is a key early text in which Mao Zedong discusses the need for a fundamental transformation of Chinese thought and morality. To discard the old and establish the new is no one-day task. Mao Zedong keenly realized that if social change remained merely at the level of institutional adjustment, it was like attending to the branches while neglecting the roots, unable to touch the superstition and ignorance deep in the people’s thinking: “Today’s reforms all start from the minor details, such as parliament, constitution, president, cabinet, military affairs, industry, education — all are minor details.” He understood deeply that to eradicate deeply rooted superstitious thinking, one must start from the very source of thought and morality, only then can one discard the false and retain the true, break the old and establish the new. What is the root of clearing away superstition? In the letter to Li Jinxi, Mao Zedong pointed out: “As for the root source, it is the truth of the universe.” He regarded philosophy as an important means “to make these ignorant people become wise,” and regarded ethics as “the science that defines the purpose of human life and the methods to achieve that purpose.” He advocated starting from the great root source of the universe to “transform philosophy and transform ethics,” thereby eradicating superstition at its source and remolding the self. In September, in conversation with Zhang Kundi, Mao Zedong further pointed out: “Now the national character is indolent, hypocrisy is mutually respected, slavishness has become ingrained, thinking is narrow.” To break this phenomenon, he advocated a “discard the old and promote the new” family revolution and teacher-student revolution, striving to “wash away the old thinking of the people and develop their new thinking,” pursuing a thorough transformation of the people’s ideological concepts.

其二,实行哲学伦理学革命。1917年8月23日,毛泽东在致黎锦熙的长信中写道:“自昔无知识,近顷略阅书报,将中外事态略为比较,觉吾国人积弊甚深,思想太旧,道德太坏。夫思想主人之心,道德范人之行,二者不洁,遍地皆污。盖二者之势力,无在不为所弥漫也。思想道德必真必实。吾国思想与道德,可以伪而不真、虚而不实之两言括之,五千年流传到今,种根甚深,结蒂甚固,非有大力不易摧陷廓清。”革故鼎新,非一日之功。毛泽东敏锐地意识到,社会变革若仅仅停留于制度上的调整,犹如舍本逐末,无法触及民众思想深处的迷信与蒙昧:“今日变法,俱从枝节入手,如议会、宪法、总统、内阁、军事、实业、教育,一切皆枝节也。”他深知,欲拔除根深蒂固的迷信思想,必须从思想与道德的本源入手,方能去伪存真、破旧立新。何为廓清迷信的根本?在致黎锦熙的信中,毛泽东指出:“夫本源者,宇宙之真理。”他将哲学视作“使此愚人而归于智”的重要手段,将伦理学视作“规定人生目的及达到人生目的的方法之科学”,主张从宇宙的大本大源入手“改造哲学、改造伦理学”,从而从根源上铲除迷信、重塑自我。9月,在与张昆弟的交谈中,毛泽东又指出:“现在国民性惰,虚伪相崇,奴隶性成,思想狭隘。”为破除这一现象,他主张“除旧布新”的家族革命与师生革命,力求“洗涤国民之旧思想,开发其新思想”,追求国民思想观念上的彻底变革。

Third, upholding individual value and manifesting free will. One of the achievements of the May Fourth New Culture Movement was to excavate the individual and awaken self-awareness. During this period, Mao Zedong advocated individual value and championed free will, regarding them as important means to oppose superstition. While reading *The Principles of Ethics*, Mao Zedong annotated: “Society is established for the individual, not the individual for society.” Although society is composed of individuals, the value of the individual should not be suppressed by external forces such as society, religion, or power. On the contrary, the value of the individual is supreme, and free will is the foundation of ideological liberation. He further pointed out: “Anyone who suppresses the individual or violates individuality commits the greatest crime. The Three Bonds [25]25 The Three Bonds (三纲) are the Confucian principles of ruler guiding subject, father guiding son, and husband guiding wife. of our country must be abolished; the church, the capitalist, the monarch, and the state — these four are equally the demons of the world.” Feudal rites, monarchical autocracy, religious superstition, and other forces of power imprisoned the individual’s free will, reducing the individual to a slave of superstition and ignorance. Mao Zedong resolutely opposed this suppression by power and advocated re-examining individual value and throwing off the shackles of superstition: “The power of religion, the power of literature, the power of politics, the power of society, the power of education, the power of the economy, the power of thought, the power of international relations — none of them shall have the slightest room to exist. They must all be overthrown by the loud cry of democracy.” [26]26 This passage echoes the language of the May Fourth New Culture Movement’s call for “Mr. Democracy” (德先生) and “Mr. Science” (赛先生). He emphasized that the individual should not submit to divine authority or external authority, but should revere the inner self and take the self as the highest moral standard: “Why obey God rather than obey oneself? The self is God; is there still a so-called God outside God?” This idea of “I am the universe” became a powerful weapon in his struggle against superstition, aiming to break the fetters of social power on thought by elevating individual free will, and to promote the thorough liberation of thought.

其三,高举个人价值,彰显自由意志。五四新文化运动的功绩之一在于发掘个体、唤醒自我认知。在这一时期,毛泽东倡导个人价值,主张自由意志,并将之视作反对迷信的重要手段。在阅读《伦理学原理》时,毛泽东批注道:“社会为个人而设,非个人为社会而设也。”社会虽由个人组成,但个人的价值不应被社会、宗教或权力等外在力量所压抑。相反,个人的价值至高无上,自由意志是思想解放的根基。他进一步指出:“凡有压抑个人、违背个性者,罪莫大焉。吾国之三纲在所必去,教会、资本家、君主、国家四者,同为天下之恶魔。”封建礼教、君主专制和宗教迷信等强权势力禁锢个人的自由意志,致使个体沦为迷信与蒙昧的奴隶。毛泽东坚决反对这种强权压制,主张重新审视个人价值,摆脱迷信的枷锁:“宗教的强权,文学的强权,政治的强权,社会的强权,教育的强权,经济的强权,思想的强权,国际的强权,丝毫没有存在的余地。都要借平民主义的高呼,将他打倒。”他强调,个人不应屈从于神权或外在权威,而应尊崇内心,将自我作为最高的道德准则:“服从神何不服从己,己即神也,神以外尚有所谓神乎?”这种“我即宇宙”的思想成为他在反迷信斗争中的有力武器,旨在通过提升个体自由意志,打破社会强权对思想的束缚,推动思想的彻底解放。

Fourth, realizing the union of the people to jointly resist power. During the May Fourth period, Mao Zedong’s thought underwent a major shift from elite enlightenment to the union of the people. Initially, deeply influenced by Liang Qichao’s “New Citizen” theory, Friedrich Paulsen’s “solipsism,” and Yang Changji’s idea that “heaven, earth, and the myriad things take me as their master,” he regarded “the power of the mind as the basic driving force of historical development, and ‘sages’ and ‘heroes’ as the main force of historical development.” [27]27 Liang Qichao (1873–1929) was a reformist intellectual; Friedrich Paulsen (1846–1908) was a German philosopher whose *System of Ethics* Mao annotated; Yang Changji (1871–1920) was Mao’s ethics teacher at the Hunan First Normal School. In the letter to Li Jinxi on 23 August 1917, he strictly distinguished between sages, worthies, and fools, valuing the role of heroes and sage-rulers, believing that “at that time, all under heaven would be sages, without any common fools… establishing virtue, establishing merit, and establishing words to exert oneself in this world — we preserve a compassionate heart to save the petty people.” At this time, Mao Zedong placed his hopes on the emergence of “great philosophical revolutionaries” and “great ethical revolutionaries” to open the people’s wisdom, hoping for someone like “Russia’s Tolstoy” to dispel the people’s superstitious thinking and take on the task of transforming the people’s ideological world, advocating a kind of top-down enlightenment and redemption. With the deepening of the May Fourth Movement, through many social practices such as the Hunan student movement, the movement to expel Zhang Jingyao, [28]28 Zhang Jingyao was the militarist governor of Hunan from 1918 to 1920, whose oppressive rule sparked a mass movement for his removal. the Hunan self-government movement, and presiding over workers’ night schools, Mao Zedong gradually broke through the limitations of elitism and the myth of individual hero worship, and began to realize the enormous power displayed by the masses of the people, which he had previously failed to notice. As he clearly pointed out in the “Inaugural Declaration of the *Xiangjiang Review*”: “In the past, the questions we did not doubt, the methods we did not dare to use, the words we often shrank from saying — all must now change their old appearance… we advocate the union of the masses.” On 21 July 1919, Mao Zedong published the article “The Great Union of the Popular Masses” in issue No. 2 of the *Xiangjiang Review*, further advocating “the great union of the popular masses” as the fundamental method for transforming society. He recognized that the country’s accumulated ills were deep, the people suffered bitterly from darkness, and although individual efforts, education, and industrial development had some effect, they could not fundamentally change the status quo. Only by凝聚 the power of the people and forming a powerful collective resistance could power be shaken and deep social change be promoted: “The country has decayed to the extreme, humanity has suffered to the extreme, society has become dark to the extreme. Remedial methods, transformative methods — education, industry, effort, bold advance, destruction, construction — are certainly not wrong, but there is one fundamental method among these several, and that is the great union of the popular masses.” Mao Zedong argued that to break all the shackles of superstition, one could only throw off the fetters of superstition through deep study of the truth, while in practice one must rely on the broad union of the people. This great union must start from small unions, linking together farmers, workers, students, women, primary school teachers, police, rickshaw pullers, and various other groups, gradually expanding its strength. He encouraged emulating advanced international experience, actively promoting various forms of small-scale union, accumulating small into large, and ultimately forming a powerful counterbalance to power: “The great union must start from small unions; we should rise up and imitate the compatriots of other countries. We should carry out many of our small unions.” By realizing the broad union of the people, Mao Zedong aimed to break the bonds of superstition and power,凝聚 the strength of the whole people, launch a challenge to the old system, and push society toward a more equal, free, and just direction. This measure was both a practical need of the anti-superstition struggle and would lay a solid foundation for the thorough transformation of society.

其四,实现民众联合,共同反抗强权。在五四时期,毛泽东的思想经历了从精英启蒙到民众联合的重大转变。最初,他深受梁启超“新民说”、泡尔生“唯我论”和杨昌济“天地万物,以吾为主”等思想的影响,将“心之力看做是历史发展的基本动力,把‘圣贤9、‘英雄9看作是历史发展的主体力量”。在1917年8月23日致黎锦熙的信中,他严格区分了圣人、贤人和愚人,看重英雄豪杰与圣贤君子的作用,认为“彼时天下皆为圣贤,而无凡愚……立德、立功、立言以尽力于斯世者,吾人存慈悲之心以救小人也。”此时的毛泽东寄希望于“大哲学革命家”“大伦理革命家”的出现来开启民智,希望有“俄之托尔斯泰其人者”以祛除民众迷信思想,担当改造民众思想世界的重任,倡导的是一种自上而下的启蒙与救赎。随着五四运动的深入推进,历经湖南学生运动、驱张运动、湖南自治运动、主持工人夜校等诸多社会实践,毛泽东逐渐突破精英主义的局限和对个人英雄崇拜的迷思,开始意识到过去未曾注意到的人民大众所展现出的巨大力量。如其在《〈湘江评论〉创刊宣言》中旗帜鲜明地指出:“从前吾人所不置疑的问题,所不邊取的方法,多所畏缩的说话,于今都要一改旧观……主张群众联合。”1919年7月21日,毛泽东在《湘江评论》第2号上发表《民众的大联合》一文,进一步倡导“民众的大联合”为改造社会的根本方法。他认识到,国家积弊已深,人民饱受苦难与黑暗,单凭个别的努力、教育和兴业虽有效果,但无法从根本上改变现状。唯有凝聚民众力量,形成强大的集体反抗,才能撼动强权,推动社会的深层次变革:“国家坏到了极处,人类苦到了极处,社会黑暗到了极处。补救的方法,改造的方法,教育,兴业,努力,猛进,破坏,建设,固然是不错,有为这几样根本的一个方法,就是民众的大联合。”毛泽东主张,破除一切迷信桎梏,唯有通过深入研究真理,才能摆脱迷信的枷锁,而在实践上则必须依赖广泛的民众联合。这种大联合需从小联合起步,联结农夫、工人、学生、女子、小学教师、警察、车夫等各色群体,逐步扩大力量。他鼓励效仿国际先进经验,积极推动各种形式的小规模联合,积小成大,最终形成对强权的有力抗衡:“大联合必要从小联合入手,我们应该起而仿效别国的同胞们。我们应该多多进行我们的小联合。”通过实现民众的广泛联合,毛泽东意在打破迷信与强权的束缚,凝聚全民之力,向旧制度发起挑战,推动社会朝着更加平等、自由、公正的方向迈进。这一举措既是反迷信斗争的实践需求,也将为社会的彻底变革奠定坚实基础。

IV. Conclusion

四、结语

Mao Zedong’s anti-superstition thought originated in his public participation in school study, reading newspapers and running newspapers, and joining learned societies. In this process, he gradually came into contact with and accepted the enlightenment ideas of science and democracy, and began to question traditional superstitious concepts. In the surging tide of the New Culture Movement, through extensive reading of progressive publications such as *New Youth*, and active participation in activities of the New Citizen Society, the Philosophy Research Society, the Journalism Research Society, and others, Mao Zedong further strengthened his ideological understanding of anti-superstition. During the May Fourth period, he actively threw himself into Hunan’s cultural enlightenment and political practices such as the “strike” and the “expulsion of Zhang [Jingyao],” deeply participating in the May Fourth wave of resistance. In his early school study, newspaper reading and running, participation in learned societies, and practical political activities, Mao Zedong’s anti-superstition thought initially took shape.

毛泽东的反迷信思想发轲于其在学堂求学、读报办报、加入学会的公共领域参与之中。在这一过程中,他逐渐接触并接受了科学、民主的启蒙思想,开始质疑传统的迷信观念。在新文化运动的汹涌浪潮中,毛泽东通过广泛阅读《新青年》等进步刊物,积极参与新民学会、哲学研究会、新闻学研究会等活动,进一步强化了反迷信的思想认知。五四时期,他积极投身于湖南的文化启蒙与“罢课”“驱张”等政治实践,深入地参与到五四的反抗浪潮之中。在早期求学、读报办报、参加学会及现实的政治实践中,毛泽东反迷信思想初步形成。

During the May Fourth period, Mao Zedong’s anti-superstition thought was concentratedly expressed in newspapers and periodicals such as the *Xiangjiang Review* and *Ta Kung Pao* as well as in his correspondence with friends, and it still bore a distinct Enlightenment character. Under the influence of May Fourth discourse, the Enlightenment narrative of “science” and “democracy” became Mao’s main mode of thinking and manner of speech during the May Fourth period. “Using science to oppose ignorance” and “using democracy to oppose authority” constituted the important intellectual path through which he understood the harm of “superstition.” Remolding the self and transforming the national populace were the core aims of Mao’s anti-superstition discourse during the May Fourth period. To achieve this goal, he vigorously advocated for the establishment of education, the clearing away of intellectual obscurantism, the promotion of a revolution in philosophy and ethics, and the transformation of the nation’s thought. At the same time, he strongly championed individual value and free will, and encouraged the people to unite in common resistance against power. These measures not only provided a practical and feasible path of struggle for anti-superstition practice, but also laid a solid foundation for the thorough transformation of society.

五四时期毛泽东的反迷信思想在《湘江评论》《大公报》等报刊及与友人的往来通信中得以集中表达,仍带有鲜明的启蒙色彩。在五四话语的浸润下,“科学”与“民主”的启蒙叙事成为毛泽东五四时期主要的思维模式与话语言说方式,“以科学反对愚昧”“以民主反对权威”构成其认知“迷信”危害的重要思维路径。重塑自我与改造国民是毛泽东五四时期反迷信话语的核心指向。为实现这一目标,他大力主张兴办教育,廓清思想蒙昧,推动哲学伦理学革命,变换全国思想。同时,他极力倡导个人价值与自由意志,鼓励民众联合,共同反抗强权。这些举措既为反迷信实践提供了切实可行的斗争路径,也为社会的彻底变革奠定坚实的基础。

It is worth noting that Mao’s thought at this time was still “a hodgepodge of liberalism, democratic reformism, utopian socialism, and other ideas,” and his view of the problem of superstition had not yet formed a scientific understanding from a Marxist perspective. Although in a series of articles criticizing marriage superstitions Mao had already touched on insights into their social roots, this was still limited and had not yet formed a fundamental and systematic understanding. Shortly after writing these articles, Mao threw himself into the practice of “half-work half-study” “work-studyism.” [29]29 Work-studyism (工读主义) was a social reform movement popular among Chinese intellectuals in the early 20th century, advocating that students combine manual labor with study as a means of self-cultivation and social transformation. His understanding of “using science to oppose ignorance” was still some distance from scientific socialism, and his practical concern with “using democracy to oppose authority” still bore the color of democratic reformism.

值得注意的是,毛泽东此时的思想仍是“自由主义、民主改良主义、空想社会主义等思想的大杂烩”,其对于迷信问题的看法尚未形成马克思主义的科学认识。尽管在批判婚姻迷信的一系列文章中,毛泽东已涉及对其社会根源的洞察,但仍有所局限,尚为形成根本性、系统性的认知。在撰文后不久,毛泽东又投身于“半耕半读”的“工读主义”实践之中。其“以科学反对愚昧”的认知距科学社会主义仍有一定距离,其“以民主反对权威”的现实关怀仍带有民主改良主义色彩。

It was not until the later period of the May Fourth Movement, at the end of 1919, that Mao went north for a second time to carry out the “Movement to Expel Zhang Jingyao.” [30]30 The Movement to Expel Zhang Jingyao (驱张运动) was a campaign launched in 1919–1920 by Hunan students and intellectuals, including Mao Zedong, to oust Zhang Jingyao, the militarist governor of Hunan province, whom they accused of misrule and brutality. Through the introduction of Li Dazhao and Wang Guangqi, he joined the Young China Association [31]31 The Young China Association (少年中国学会) was a progressive intellectual organization founded in 1919 by Li Dazhao, Wang Guangqi, and others, which aimed at the cultural and political renewal of China and included members with diverse ideological leanings, from anarchism to Marxism. and read a large number of books and periodicals on Marxism and the Russian Revolution. In April of the following year, Mao left Beijing for Shanghai, where he again discussed Marxism in depth with Chen Duxiu. By the summer of 1920, as he himself recounted, guided by the three books *The Communist Manifesto*, *Class Struggle*, and *The History of Socialism*, he “had already become a Marxist,” and also considered himself “a Marxist.” [32]32 The three books Mao refers to are *The Communist Manifesto* by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, *Class Struggle* (a collection of Marx’s writings edited by Karl Kautsky), and *The History of Socialism* by Thomas Kirkup. From then on, Mao analyzed and criticized social problems such as superstition from a Marxist standpoint, viewpoint, and method, raising his understanding of anti-superstition and other issues to a new stage that was more scientific and more profound.

直至五四运动后期,1919年底,为开展“驱张运动”,毛泽东二次北上,经李大钊、王光祈的介绍加入少年中国学会,阅读了大量马克思主义和俄国革命的书刊。次年4月,毛泽东离开北京去上海,又与陈独秀深入谈论了马克思主义。至1920年夏天,如其自述,在《共产党宣言》《阶级斗争》《社会主义史》三本书的指引下,他“已成为一个马克思主义者了”,而且也认为“自己是一个马克思主义者了”。从此,毛泽东以马克思主义的立场、观点和方法来分析和批判迷信等社会问题,将对反迷信等的认识提高到更加科学、更加深刻的新阶段。

(Author’s bio: Zeng Jinghan, doctoral student at the School of Marxism, Peking University)

（作者简介：曾靖涵,北京大学马克思主义学院博士研究生）

Online editor: Tongxin

网络编辑：同心