The Hidden Treasure Trove of Lenin’s Philosophical Thought

At the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th, the Second International experienced ideological twists and turns in its understanding of Marxist philosophy. To critique erroneous interpretations of Marxist philosophy and to advance its development, Lenin produced a series of philosophical works, among which the most representative are *Materialism and Empirio-Criticism* and the *Philosophical Notebooks*. Because the *Philosophical Notebooks* take the form of reading notes and summaries, they have not received the same attention as *Materialism and Empirio-Criticism*, and people often tend to underestimate their important value and status. In fact, *Materialism and Empirio-Criticism* mainly expounds the epistemological principles of dialectical materialism, while the *Philosophical Notebooks* comprehensively elaborate on issues of materialist dialectics, the history of philosophy, and the philosophy of nature, covering all aspects of Lenin’s philosophical thought. Of course, since the *Philosophical Notebooks* are preparatory works for personal study, many of Lenin’s incisive insights and innovative viewpoints are scattered among the voluminous notes, and many new principles and new theses have not yet been elaborated in detail, lacking a systematized and integrated “intellectual appearance.” They constitute a “hidden” treasure trove of philosophical thought.

19世纪末20世纪初，第二国际对马克思主义哲学的认识出现了思想波折。为批判对马克思主义哲学的错误理解，推动马克思主义哲学发展，列宁创作了一系列哲学著作，其中比较有代表性的是《唯物主义和经验批判主义》与《哲学笔记》。《哲学笔记》由于其读书笔记和摘要的形式，没有受到如《唯物主义和经验批判主义》那样的重视，人们往往容易低估《哲学笔记》的重要价值和地位。实际上，《唯物主义和经验批判主义》主要阐发的是辩证唯物主义的认识论原理，《哲学笔记》则是全面阐发唯物辩证法、哲学史、自然哲学等方面的问题，涵盖了列宁哲学思想的各个方面。当然，由于《哲学笔记》是供个人研究使用的准备性著作，列宁哲学思想的许多精辟见解、创新观点还散落在庞杂的各篇笔记中，不少新原理、新论断还没有得到详细阐发，还不具备体系化、整体化的“思想外观”，是一座“隐形”的哲学思想宝库。

From the perspective of textual criticism and edition investigation, the *Philosophical Notebooks* is the general term used by later researchers for the summaries, short essays, notes, and marginalia Lenin wrote over a 20-year period from 1895 to 1916 while studying philosophical works and exploring Marxist philosophy. The main body of the *Philosophical Notebooks* consists of eight blue notebooks written consecutively by Lenin from November 1914 to May 1915, which Lenin himself titled *Philosophical Notebooks: Hegel, Feuerbach, and Others*. When writing these eight blue notebooks, Lenin was in Bern, Switzerland, so some scholars call them the *Bern Notebooks*. The *Philosophical Notebooks* were not published during Lenin’s lifetime. In the Soviet Union, the first to come into public view was the *Conspectus of Hegel’s Science of Logic*. Deborin, then editor-in-chief of the journal *Under the Banner of Marxism*, wrote a brief introduction, suggesting that Lenin intended to write a monograph on materialist dialectics. In 1929–1930, the eight blue notebooks from the *Philosophical Notebooks* were published in volumes 9 and 12 of the Russian edition of the *Lenin Collected Works*. In 1963, the 5th Russian edition of the *Complete Works of Lenin* reorganized Lenin’s philosophical notes into volume 29, adding Lenin’s marginalia on two books by Dietzgen and Steklov. In China, the first Chinese edition of the *Philosophical Notebooks* was published as a separate volume by the People’s Publishing House in 1956, containing 27 documents. In 1959, the contents and translations were revised according to the 4th Russian edition of the *Complete Works of Lenin*, resulting in 46 documents, arranged historically and chronologically, and published as volume 38 of the first Chinese edition of the *Complete Works of Lenin*. In the second Chinese edition, volume 55, a further revision was made based on the 5th Russian edition, volume 29, omitting some articles and abandoning the original chronological structure, resulting in 38 documents divided into three categories: first, summaries and short essays on various philosophical works; second, notes on various books, articles, and book reviews on philosophy and natural science; and third, marginalia from reading others’ works.

从文献学和版本考察角度来看，《哲学笔记》是后来的研究者对列宁在1895—1916年长达20年间研读哲学著作和探讨马克思主义哲学时所写的摘要、短文、札记和批注的通称。《哲学笔记》的主体部分，是列宁在1914年11月至1915年5月连续写成的八个蓝皮笔记本，列宁当年将其命名为《哲学笔记本。黑格尔、费尔巴哈及其他》。写作这八个蓝皮笔记时，列宁是在瑞士的伯尔尼，因此有学者将其称作《伯尔尼笔记》。《哲学笔记》在列宁生前没有发表。在苏联，最早进入人们视野的是《黑格尔〈逻辑学〉一书摘要》。时任《在马克思主义的旗帜下》杂志主编的德波林写了一个简介，认为列宁打算写一本唯物辩证法的专著。1929—1930年《列宁文集》俄文版第9卷和第12卷中公开发表了《哲学笔记》中的八个蓝皮笔记。1963年，《列宁全集》俄文第5版对列宁哲学笔记作了重新编排，编为第29卷，并增加了列宁对于狄慈根和斯切克洛夫的两本书的批注。在中国，1956年，《哲学笔记》的第一个中文版本由人民出版社以单行本形式出版，共收入27 篇文献。1959年，根据《列宁全集》俄文第4版重新校订了篇目和译文，共收入46篇文献，这些笔记按照年代顺序进行历史性逻辑编排，并作为《列宁全集》中文第一版第38卷出版。在中文第二版第55卷中，根据《列宁全集》俄文第5版第29卷又作了重新校订，省略了一些文章，并放弃了原来的时间顺序结构，共计38篇文献被分为三类进行编排：一是关于各种哲学著作的摘要和短文；二是关于哲学和自然科学的各种书籍、论文和书评的札记；三是阅读他人著作的批注。

How to grasp the central theme and core content of the *Philosophical Notebooks* is a matter of considerable academic controversy. In traditional Soviet research, the representative view is Kedrov’s “plan-conception theory,” which regards the *Philosophical Notebooks* as preparatory material for an unfinished academic monograph on materialist dialectics, with the “16 Elements of Dialectics” as its core. Another view holds that Kedrov’s interpretation is “an a priori, teleological, and false interpretive model for studying Lenin’s philosophical thought.” Lenin did not simply “invert” Hegel but rather elaborated dialectical theory on the basis of practice, thereby constructing a practical dialectics. Yet another view is that these notebooks constitute a body of academic literature containing multiple heterogeneities, and some even see them as grounds for a rupture in the trajectory of Lenin’s philosophical thought. Some scholars of Western “Leninology” not only oppose the *Philosophical Notebooks* to Lenin’s early thought but also regard them as the foundational work for the Hegelianization of Marxist philosophy. These views, based on different theoretical perspectives and ideological positions, are diverse and contradictory. In fact, as the “hidden treasure trove” of Lenin’s philosophical thought, the *Philosophical Notebooks* is a philosophical work of broad content, profound thought, and rich creativity. This work laid a solid philosophical foundation for the development of Marxism into the new Leninist stage of the 20th century.

如何把握《哲学笔记》的思想主旨和核心内容，学术界颇有争议。在苏联的传统研究中，代表性观点是凯德诺夫及其“计划构想论”，《哲学笔记》被视为列宁未完成的一部关于唯物辩证法的学术专著的准备材料，其核心是“辩证法16要素”。另一种观点认为，凯德诺夫的理解是“一种先验的、目的论的、虚假的研究列宁哲学思想的解读模式”。列宁不是简单地“颠倒”黑格尔，而是以实践为基础来阐释辩证法理论，从而构建一种实践辩证法。还有观点认为，这些笔记是包含了多重异质性的学术文献群，甚至有人将之视为列宁哲学思想进程自我断裂的根据。西方“列宁学”的一些学者不仅把《哲学笔记》与列宁的早期思想对立起来，而且将之视为马克思主义哲学黑格尔主义化的奠基之作。这些观点基于不同理论视角和意识形态立场，莫衷一是。实际上，作为列宁哲学思想的“隐形宝库”，《哲学笔记》是一部内容广博、思想深刻、富有创造性的哲学著作。这一著作为把马克思主义发展到20世纪列宁主义新阶段，奠定了坚实的哲学基础。

The theoretical innovation of the *Philosophical Notebooks* lies not in individual propositions or viewpoints but in its overall conception, which contains Lenin’s plan for constructing a theoretical system of materialist dialectics. In the notebooks, Lenin systematically traces the history of the development of dialectical thought from the ancient Greek Heraclitus and Aristotle to Hegel. The intellectual focus and central theme lie in a comparative study of Hegel’s logic and Marx’s logic in *Capital*, summarizing the basic elements of dialectics and refining and elevating a “logic” in the capital-letter sense as the core of the theoretical system of materialist dialectics. A red thread running through the entire system of materialist dialectics is the principle of the identity of dialectics, logic, and the theory of knowledge. “In *Capital*, logic, dialectics and the theory of knowledge of materialism [three words are not needed: they are one and the same thing] are applied to one science.” Lenin proposed and demonstrated that the law of the unity of opposites is the essence and core of dialectics, took the view of the unity of opposites between the individual and the general as the intellectual essence of dialectical logic, analyzed the dialectical law of the unity and struggle of opposites, and discussed the fundamental difference between the dialectical view of development and the metaphysical view of development. Lenin criticized the neo-Kantian so-called “pure logic and theory of knowledge,” analyzed the epistemological and class roots of idealism, and made objective dialectics an important component of the Marxist theory of knowledge.

《哲学笔记》的理论创新不在于个别命题和观点，而在于其整体创意，其中包含着建构唯物辩证法理论体系的列宁构想。在笔记中，列宁系统追溯了从古希腊赫拉克利特、亚里士多德到黑格尔为代表的整个辩证法思想发展史。其思想重心和思想主旨是在黑格尔逻辑学与马克思《资本论》逻辑的比较研究中，概括辩证法的基本要素，提炼升华出大写字母的“逻辑”，作为唯物辩证法理论体系的核心。贯穿唯物辩证法体系的一条思想红线，是辩证法、逻辑和认识论三者同一的原则。“在《资本论》中，唯物主义的逻辑、辩证法和认识论不必要三个词：它们是同一个东西都应用于一门科学。”列宁提出并论证了对立统一规律是辩证法的实质和核心，把个别与一般对立统一的共殊观，作为辩证逻辑的思想精髓，分析了对立面统一和斗争的辩证规律，论述了辩证发展观和形而上学发展观的根本区别。列宁批判了新康德主义所谓“纯粹逻辑与认识论”，剖析了唯心主义的认识论根源和阶级根源，把客观辩证法作为马克思主义认识论的重要内容。

Notes on works of natural science occupy a prominent place in the *Philosophical Notebooks*. Lenin’s interest in the history of natural science and the technological revolution was not primarily aimed at studying natural science itself, but rather at exploring social science and social practice from the vantage point of natural science. “The powerful current from natural science to social science, which existed in Petty’s time, also existed in Marx’s time. By the 20th century, this current was equally powerful, indeed even more so.” At the dawn of the 20th-century scientific revolution, Lenin, with the philosophical insight of “seeing the whole from a single detail,” foresaw the general trend toward the integration and systematization of contemporary scientific and technological revolution and of contemporary human scientific cognition. Lenin pointed out: “Before man is a web of natural phenomena,” and “Truth is constituted from the totality of all aspects of phenomena, reality, and their (mutual) relations.” The principle of wholeness and system is an important principle emphasized by Lenin’s materialist dialectics, which to a certain extent foreshadowed the general trend of the increasingly prominent role of the principle of wholeness and the systems approach. Lenin opposed a single, linear understanding of causality and emphasized the dialectical complexity of causal relations. Lenin pointed out: “It is extremely instructive to compare the ‘struggle’ of neo-empiricism (or ‘physical idealism’) with Hegel’s method of solving problems, or more precisely, with his dialectical method,” and that modern physics “opposes the absolutization, simplification, and idolization of the concept of law,” because “every law is narrow, incomplete, and approximate.” Lenin’s profound thought on the dialectical nature of causal connections and the opposition to the absolutization of laws foresaw the general trend of the increasing failure of mechanical determinism and the markedly enhanced role of statistical laws in modern natural science and cybernetics.

关于自然科学著作的札记在《哲学笔记》中占有突出地位。列宁之所以关注自然科学史和科技革命，目的主要不在于研究自然科学本身，而在于从自然科学入手探究社会科学和社会实践。“从自然科学奔向社会科学的强大潮流，不仅在配第时代存在，在马克思时代也是存在的。到20世纪，这个潮流是同样强大，甚至可说更加强大了。”在20世纪科学革命初见端倪的时候，列宁以“见微而知著”的哲学洞察，预见了当代科技革命发展和人类当代科学认识发展的整体化、系统化的大趋势。列宁指出：“在人面前是自然现象之网”，“真理就是由现象、现实的一切方面的总和以及它们的（相互）关系构成的”。整体性、系统性原则是列宁唯物辩证法思想强调的重要原则，这在一定程度上预示了整体原则和系统方法作用日益突出的大趋势。列宁反对单一、线性地理解因果关系，强调因果关系的辩证复杂性。列宁指出：“把新经验论（或‘物理学唯心主义’）的‘挣扎’同黑格尔解决问题的方法，更确切地说，同他的辩证方法加以比较，是极有教益的”，现代物理学“反对把规律的概念绝对化、简单化、偶像化”，因为“任何规律都是狭隘的、不完全的、近似的”。列宁关于因果联系的辩证性和反对把规律绝对化的深刻思想，预见了现代自然科学和控制论中机械决定论日益失效、统计规律作用显著增强的大趋势。

The important value of the *Philosophical Notebooks* also lies in the fact that, by revealing the dialectics of the universal and the particular in historical development, it provides a theoretical basis from a philosophical height for opening up the socialist path in economically and culturally backward countries. The general laws of historical development are merely the overall trend of historical development. The concrete path of development of any given country is the result of the combined effect of various factors in a specific period, embodying the unity of universality and particularity. The universal is always contained within the particular; the universal law never appears in a “pure form” but can only be expressed through concrete, specific forms. The historical question posed by the classical Marxist writers as to whether Eastern countries could leap over the “capitalist caudine forks”[6]6 The “capitalist caudine forks” (资本主义卡夫丁峡谷) is a metaphor used by Marx and Engels, referring to the capitalist stage of development as a painful but historically necessary passage, based on the ancient Roman defeat at the Caudine Forks. received a clear answer from Lenin. In Lenin’s view, backward Russia in the East could take the socialist path without passing through the stage of capitalist development. This particularity, which differs from the path and form of social development in Western Europe, does not violate the universal laws of historical development revealed by historical materialism; on the contrary, it is precisely a direct embodiment of the laws of historical development, the dialectics of the universal and the particular in the historical sphere. A common crux of dogmatists, including various forms of opportunists, lies in their failure to understand the dialectics of the universal and the particular in historical development. These philosophical methodological principles, originating from the founders of Marxism such as Marx and Engels, were developed by Lenin into a complete and systematic methodological system, which has extremely important theoretical value and practical significance for promoting the development of Marxism and the socialist movement.

《哲学笔记》的重要价值，还在于通过揭示历史发展中一般与个别的辩证法，从哲学高度为经济文化落后国家开辟社会主义道路提供了理论依据。历史发展的一般规律，只是历史发展的总体趋势。任何一个国家的具体发展道路，则是特定时期各种因素综合作用的结果，体现出普遍性和特殊性的统一。一般总是寓于个别之中，普遍规律不会以“纯粹的形式”出现，而只能通过具体的特殊形式表现出来。马克思主义经典作家关于东方国家能否跨越“资本主义卡夫丁峡谷”的历史之问，在列宁那里得到了清晰的答案。在列宁看来，东方落后的俄国可以不经过资本主义的发展阶段，就走上社会主义道路。这种不同于西欧社会发展道路和形式的特殊性，并不违背唯物史观揭示的历史发展普遍规律，而恰恰是历史发展规律的直接体现，是历史领域一般与个别的辩证法。教条主义者包括各种形式的机会主义者的一个共同症结，就在于不懂得历史发展中一般与个别的辩证法。这些哲学方法论原则，源自马克思、恩格斯等马克思主义创始人，在列宁那里发展成为完整、系统的方法论体系，对于推动马克思主义发展和社会主义运动，具有极为重要的理论价值和实践意义。

(The author is a professor at the School of Marxism, Peking University)

（作者系北京大学马克思主义学院教授）

Online editor: Tongxin

网络编辑：同心