From Adapting Marxism to the Chinese Context to the Initial Formation of Sinicized Marxism

Chinese Marxist philosophy is not singular but plural; it has appeared in different theoretical forms and knowledge systems in history. It is commonly believed that the first Marxist philosophical system to spread in China was the materialist conception of history. In fact, before this system spread, the social evolutionism system had already existed for some time, entering China through the abridged translation of *The Great Commonwealth* (*Datongxue*) by Timothy Richard and Cai Erkang. Those who disseminated this system included the bourgeois reformists, the bourgeois revolutionaries, anarchists, social democrats, and others. They did not truly believe in Marxism, nor would they take it as an ideological weapon for understanding and transforming the world. The Chinese Communists were able to consciously apply the materialist conception of history to guide the National Revolution, but due to various subjective and objective constraints, they turned "application" into "mechanical copying." The failure of the Great Revolution forced the Chinese Communists, guided by dialectical materialism, to integrate the basic tenets of Marxism with China's specific realities and with the finest traditional Chinese culture (hereinafter referred to as the "Two Integrations"), and to explore a new path for the Chinese revolution. The ideological line of "seeking truth from facts" is a representative achievement of the Sinicization of dialectical materialism during the first leap in adapting Marxism to the Chinese context. The theory of New Democracy is a representative achievement of the Sinicization of historical materialism during the first leap in adapting Marxism to the Chinese context. Their emergence marks the initial formation of Sinicized Marxism. From the beginning of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context to the initial formation of Sinicized Marxism, the theoretical form underwent an evolution from social evolutionism to the materialist conception of history, and then to dialectical materialism and historical materialism; the practical process underwent an evolution from rejecting Marxism to mechanically copying Marxism, and then to treating Marxism dialectically. This article will sort out and explore this process from the perspective of intellectual history.

中国马克思主义哲学并非单数而是复数，在历史上曾经以不同的理论形态和知识体系出现。人们通常认为，在中国传播的第一个马克思主义哲学体系是唯物史观。实际上，在这一体系传播之前，社会进化论体系已经存在了一段时间，它是随着李提摩太和蔡尔康节译的《大同学》进入中国的。传播这种体系的有资产阶级改良派、资产阶级革命派、无政府主义者、社会民主主义者等，他们并不真正信仰马克思主义，所以也不会把它作为认识世界和改造世界的思想武器。中国共产党人能够自觉地运用唯物史观指导国民革命，但由于受到各种主客观条件的限制，把“应用”变成了“照搬照抄”。大革命的失败，倒逼中国共产党人以唯物辩证法为指导，把马克思主义基本原理同中国具体实际相结合、同中华优秀传统文化相结合（以下简称“两个结合”），探索中国革命的新路。“实事求是”的思想路线是马克思主义中国化第一次飞跃过程中辩证唯物主义中国化的代表性成果。新民主主义理论是马克思主义中国化第一次飞跃过程中历史唯物主义中国化的代表性成果。它们的出现，标志着中国化马克思主义的初步形成。从马克思主义开始中国化到中国化马克思主义的初步形成，理论形态经历了从社会进化论到唯物史观再到辩证唯物主义和历史唯物主义的演变，实践进程则经历了从拒斥马克思主义到照搬马克思主义再到辩证对待马克思主义的演变。本文将从学术史的角度梳理、探究这一过程。

I. The Significance of the Beginning of Translating Fragments of *Capital*

一、《资本论》片段翻译的开端意义

If someone brought a work by Marx to China, but no Chinese translated, understood, or interpreted its ideas in their mother tongue, could this be called Chinese Marxism? Obviously not. Historically and logically, adapting Marxism to the Chinese context began when its texts were translated into Chinese. To put it simply, "Sinicization" began with "the Chinese language." A text does not necessarily have to be a complete work; fragments can also be called texts.

如果有人把一本马克思的著作带到了中国，而没有中国人以母语来翻译、理解、解释其中的思想，那么这能否称为中国马克思主义呢？显然不能。历史地和逻辑地看，马克思主义中国化始于其文本被翻译为汉语之时。简单一点说，“中国化”始于“中国话”。文本（text）不一定是完整的作品，只言片语也可以称作文本。

In 1899, *The Review of the Times* (*Wanguo Gongbao*) serialized the abridged translation of *The Great Commonwealth* by Timothy Richard and Cai Erkang. This is the earliest Chinese document discovered to date that mentions Marx's name and his doctrine. Although some scholars believe that *A History of Western Civil Law* (*Taixi Minfa Zhi*) (based on Thomas Kirkup's *A History of Socialism*) introduced Marxism even earlier (1898), no physical evidence has yet been found to support this. Chapter 1 of *The Great Commonwealth* quotes a passage from Marx's works: "Those who form joint-stock companies have power that covers the five continents, far exceeding that of monarchs and ministers over a single country. If we do not make early preparations, allowing it to spread day by day, I fear that all the wealth of the globe will fall into their hands. But if this situation ever comes to pass, it will be the time when the power of the rich is exhausted. Why? Because when the poor reach that point, having no alternative left, they will have no choice but to use their own inherent power to pacify the people and save the world." It is this translation that opened the door to adapting Marxism to the Chinese context. The prevailing view in academia is that it was compiled from fragments of the *Communist Manifesto*. Many works and articles even assert: "Those who form joint-stock companies have power that covers the five continents, far exceeding that of monarchs and ministers over a single country" is now translated as "The bourgeoisie, by the rapid improvement of all instruments of production, by the immensely facilitated means of communication, draws all, even the most barbarian, nations into civilization."

1899年，《万国公报》连载李提摩太、蔡尔康节译的《大同学》，这是迄今为止发现的最早提及马克思名字及其学说的中文文献。虽然也有学者相信，《泰西民法志》（底本是Thomas Kirkup的A History of Socialism）介绍马克思主义更早一些（1898年），但至今尚未发现可以佐证的实物。《大同学》第一章援引了马克思著作中的一段文字：“纠股办事之人，其权笼罩五洲，突过于君相之范围一国。吾侪若不早为之所，任其曼延日广，诚恐遍地球之财币，必将尽入其手。然万一到此时势，当即系富家权尽之时。何也？穷黎既至其时，实已计无复之，不得不出其自有之权，用以安民而救世。”正是这段文字的翻译，开启了马克思主义中国化之门。学术界流行的看法是，它由《共产党宣言》中的某些片段连缀编译而成，不少著作、文章甚至断言：“纠股办事之人，其权笼罩五洲，突过于君相之范围一国”现在翻译为“资产阶级，由于开拓了世界市场，使一切国家的生产和消费都成为世界性的了”。

The source text of *The Great Commonwealth* is Benjamin Kidd's *Social Evolution*. A thorough search of this book reveals only two quotations from Marx's works, both from the English edition of *Capital*. The entire book does not mention the *Communist Manifesto*; therefore, it cannot be the source of the aforementioned translation. Of the two quotations from *Capital*, one is extremely short and does not match in either length or meaning; the other is longer and is presumed to be the original text of the aforementioned translation:

《大同学》的底本是颉德（Benjamin Kidd）的《社会进化》（Social Evolution）。遍查此书，仅能找到两处马克思著作的引文，均出自英文版《资本论》（Capital）。全书未提到《共产党宣言》，因此，它不可能成为前述译文的来源。出自《资本论》的两处引文，一处极短，无论在篇幅上还是文意上均不匹配，另一处较长，推测为前述译文的原文：

Along with the constantly diminishing number of the magnates of capital, who usurp and monopolise all advantages of this process of transformation, grow the mass of misery, oppression, slavery, degradation, exploitation; but with this, too, grows the revolt of the working class, a class always increasing in numbers, and disciplined, united, organised by the very mechanism of the process of capitalist production itself. The monopoly of capital becomes a fetter upon the mode of production, which has sprung up and flourished along with and under it. Centralisation of the means of production and socialisation of labor, at last, reach a point where they become incompatible with their capitalist integument. This integument is burst asunder. The knell of capitalist private property sounds.

Along with the constantly diminishing number of the magnates of capital，who usurp and monopolise all advantages of this process of transformation，grow the mass of misery，oppression，slavery，degradation，exploitation；but with this，too，grows the revolt of the working class，a class always increasing in numbers，and disciplined，united，organised by the very mechanism of the process of capitalist production itself. The monopoly of capital becomes a fetter upon the mode of production，which has sprung up and flourished along with and under it. Centralisation of the means of production and socialisation of labor，at last，reach a point where they become incompatible with their capitalist integument. This integument is burst asunder. The knell of capitalist private property sounds.

The Chinese 2nd edition of the *Complete Works of Marx and Engels* translates this as: "Along with the constantly diminishing number of the magnates of capital, who usurp and monopolise all advantages of this process of transformation, the mass of misery, oppression, slavery, degradation, and exploitation grows; but with this, too, grows the revolt of the working class, a class always increasing in numbers, and disciplined, united, organised by the very mechanism of the process of capitalist production itself. The monopoly of capital becomes a fetter upon the mode of production, which has sprung up and flourished along with and under it. The centralisation of the means of production and the socialisation of labour at last reach a point where they become incompatible with their capitalist integument. This integument is burst asunder. The knell of capitalist private property sounds." The quotation from Marx's works in *The Great Commonwealth* appears in Chapter 1, while this passage comes from Chapter 8 of *Social Evolution*. Chapter 1 of *Social Evolution* introduces Marx's doctrine in paraphrased form, and Chapter 8 of *The Great Commonwealth* also touches on Marx's ideas; the content of the two is largely identical.

《马克思恩格斯全集》中文第2版将其翻译为：“随着那些掠夺和垄断这一转化过程的全部利益的资本巨头不断减少，贫困、压迫、奴役、退化和剥削的程度不断加深，而日益壮大的、由资本主义生产过程本身的机制所训练、联合和组织起来的工人阶级的反抗也不断增长。资本的垄断成了与这种垄断一起并在这种垄断之下繁盛起来的生产方式的桎梏。生产资料的集中和劳动的社会化，达到了同它们的资本主义外壳不能相容的地步。这个外壳就要炸毁了。资本主义私有制的丧钟就要响了。”《大同学》援引马克思著作是在第一章，而这段话出自《社会进化》的第八章。《社会进化》第一章以转述的形式介绍了马克思学说，《大同学》第八章对马克思的思想亦有涉猎，二者内容相差无几。

Although the two Chinese versions of the aforementioned translations differ in classical versus vernacular style and in free versus literal translation, the central ideas they express are consistent. The so-called “persons who manage joint-stock affairs” refer to “capital magnates,” who carry out economic expansion globally and wield greater power than “monarchs and ministers,” whose influence is confined within the bounds of a single nation. Monopoly capitalism deepens the degree of exploitation and oppression of the proletariat, inevitably leading to violent revolution and the overthrow of the capitalist system. By comparing the relevant passages from *Social Evolution* and *Datongxue* [The Great Learning], we can conclude that it was a fragment of *Capital*, not *The Communist Manifesto*, that was first translated into Chinese, marking the beginning of adapting Marxism (philosophy, political economy, scientific socialism) to the Chinese context. In terms of philosophy, it contains basic principles of historical materialism such as the theory of social basic contradictions, the theory of class struggle, and the theory of world history.

前述两个中文版本的译文，虽有文言白话之分、意译直译之别，但它们所表达的中心思想是一致的。所谓“纠股办事之人”乃指“资本巨头”，他们在全球进行经济扩张，比“君相”的权力还要大，后者的影响不过限制在一个国家的范围之内。垄断资本主义导致无产阶级受剥削压迫程度进一步加深，必然引起暴力革命并推翻资本主义制度。通过比较《社会进化》和《大同学》的相关段落，我们可以得出结论，《资本论》而非《共产党宣言》的片段最早被翻译为汉语，标志着马克思主义（哲学、政治经济学、科学社会主义）中国化的开端。就哲学来说，它包含社会基本矛盾理论、阶级斗争理论以及世界历史理论等唯物史观基本原理。

When Marxist works first entered China, many translations were of a compiled nature. There was a clear gap between the translation and the original. The Chinese version was evidently “another version” relative to the original. Even later translations that were closer to the original were still constrained by the vast differences between the target and source languages, and thus remained “another version.” Whether using inherent Chinese vocabulary in the early period or later borrowing terms from Japanese, these translated terms could hardly fully correspond in meaning and function to the source language. Take the Chinese translation of “bourgeois” and “proletarian” as an example. *Datongxue* translated them as “rich families” and “impoverished masses”; Zhu Zhixin, in his 1905 translation of a fragment of *The Communist Manifesto*, rendered them as “powerful clans” and “humble people”; later, Li Dazhao borrowed “youchanzhe” (later translated as “zichanzhe”) and “wuchanzhe” from Japanese. These terms all struggle to reveal the different relationships to the means of production. The Chinese character “chan” [property] always first evokes “property” (caichan), i.e., means of subsistence, whereas Marx’s “property” is more closely associated with “production” (shengchan), and thus primarily refers to the means of production. Even if the proletariat possesses property, as long as they do not own the means of production and still live by selling their labor power, their proletarian status remains unchanged. In the Chinese context, it seems that once the proletariat has property, it is no longer the proletariat. In German, English, and French contexts, the possibility of such misunderstanding is greatly reduced.

马克思主义著作初传入中国之际，很多翻译都带有编译的性质。译文与原文有明显差距。汉语版相对于原版来说，显然是“另一个版本”。即便后来更为贴近原文的翻译，仍然受制于目标语言和源语言的巨大差异，所以仍然是“另一个版本”。无论是初期采用的汉语固有词汇，还是后来从日文中借来的词汇，这些译语与源语言相比，在意义和功能方面都难以完全吻合。以“bourgeois”和“proletarian”的汉译为例。《大同学》将它们译作“富家”与“穷黎”，朱执信1905年翻译的《共产党宣言》片段中则将它们译作“豪右”和“细民”，再后来，李大钊从日语中借来了“有产者”（稍后译为“资产者”）和“无产者”。这些术语都难以把它们和生产资料的不同关系揭示出来。汉语中的“产”，总是首先让人联想到“财产”（property），也就是生活资料，而马克思的“产”与“生产”（production）的关联度更高，所以主要指生产资料。无产阶级尽管有了财产，但只要不占有生产资料仍以出卖劳动力为生，那么他们的无产阶级身份就没有改变。在汉语语境中，似乎无产阶级有了财产就不再是无产阶级了。在德语、英语、法语语境中，引起这种误解的可能性会大大降低。

In his preface to the abridged translation of *Datongxue*, Timothy Richard pointed out: “Because Chinese and Western grammar differ, it is not necessary to translate sentence by sentence or word by word; therefore, only the key points from each chapter are excerpted and presented without omission.” Because “Chinese and Western grammar differ,” even a word-for-word translation can hardly faithfully reproduce the meaning of the original. When discussing translation standards, many cite Yan Fu’s “faithfulness, expressiveness, and elegance.” In fact, when Yan Fu mentioned them, he was not discussing translation standards but lamenting the difficulty of translation. “The three difficulties of translation: faithfulness, expressiveness, and elegance. Seeking faithfulness alone is already very difficult; yet if one is faithful but not expressive, it is as if no translation has been done, so expressiveness is prioritized.” Faithfulness is very hard to achieve; if one pursues faithfulness at the expense of smoothness in meaning, then translation is no different from no translation. Therefore, comparatively speaking, expressiveness is more important. And to achieve smoothness in meaning, one can only adopt free translation. Inversions and additions of words and phrases, and taking liberties with meaning for convenience, are all normal. The distance in meaning between translation and original is not solely caused by differences in language itself. Sometimes, ideological factors also shape the appearance of the translation to a certain extent. Timothy Richard was well aware that “Chinese also follow in the footsteps of foreign countries and are equally deluded by them,” and hoped that translating *Datongxue* would allow China’s aspiring scholars to “deign to peruse it” and avoid taking the old Western path, so he strengthened the aspect of Kidd’s thought that “restrains nature to remedy the ills of evolution.” Yan Fu’s translation of *Evolution and Ethics* added a large number of annotations, subjecting the translation to a Spencerian transformation, strengthening the concepts of “natural selection” and “survival of the fittest,” and adding a relatively strong Social Darwinist hue, with the aim of “self-strengthening to preserve the race” and “invigorating the people’s strength, opening their wisdom, and renewing their virtue.”

李提摩太在《大同学》节译本序言中指出：“惟中西文法不同，不必句翻字译，故仅节取各章中扼要语，胪举无遗。”因为“中西文法不同”，所以即便是逐字逐句地翻译，也很难忠实再现原文的意义。在谈到翻译标准时，很多人会列举严复的“信、达、雅”。其实，严复在提及它们时，并不是在讨论翻译标准，而是在感叹翻译的困难。“译事三难：信、达、雅。求其信已大难矣，顾信矣不达，虽译犹不译也，则达尚焉。”忠实是很难做到的，如果只顾追求忠实而忽略了文意的通顺，那么翻译和不翻译也就没有什么区别了。所以，比较而言，达更重要。而要做到文意的通顺，只能采用意译的方式。词句的颠倒附益，意义的取便发挥，都是正常的。译文与原文之间的意义距离，不仅仅是语言本身的差异造成的。有时候，意识形态因素也在一定程度上塑造译文的面貌。李提摩太深知“华人亦有步外国之后，而同受其迷者”，希望翻译《大同学》而让中国的有志之士“俯赐披览”，避免走西方的旧路，所以强化了颉德思想中“节性以救进化之弊”的方面。严复翻译的《天演论》加了大量按语，对译文进行了斯宾塞主义的改造，强化了“物竞天择”“优胜劣败”观念，增添了较为浓重的社会达尔文主义色彩，目的是“自强保种”“鼓民力、开民智、新民德”。

The reason for discussing translation standards here is simply to prove one point: the translation is not equal to the original; the translation is a re-creation based on the original. The limitations and uncertainties of translation give rise to what the author calls the “quotation dilemma” or the “dilemma of quotation marks.” When we quote Marx’s “original text,” what should be inside the quotation marks is the “original text,” e.g., German, English, French, etc.—the author’s words—and not the “translation” (Chinese)—the translator’s words. Most people, when placing a translation of a foreign-language work inside quotation marks, do not realize there is anything improper about it. However, by the definition of quotation marks, this is indeed improper. The practice of placing a translation rather than the original inside quotation marks produces the “quotation dilemma” or “dilemma of quotation marks”—the content of a non-quotation contradicts the form of a quotation. Domestic scholars studying Marx and Engels’ thought mostly rely on the Chinese edition of the *Complete Works of Marx and Engels*. In fact, the Chinese edition is only a “bridge”; its significance lies in guiding us to the original text.

这里之所以讨论翻译标准问题，无非想证明这样一个观点：译文不等于原文，译文是原文基础上的再创作。翻译的限度和不确定性导致了笔者所称的“引用困境”（quotation dilemma）或“引号悖论”（dilemma of quotation marks）。当我们引用马克思的“原文”时，引号之内的应该是“原文”，例如德文、英文、法文等等，是作者的话，而不应该是“译文”（汉语）——译者的话。大多数人把外文作品的译文放进引号的时候，并没有意识到这样做有任何不妥。然而，就引号的定义来说，这样做确有不妥。将译文而非原文放进引号的做法产生了“引用困境”或“引号悖论”——非引用的内容与引用的形式相矛盾。国内学者做马克思、恩格斯思想研究，多以中文版《马克思恩格斯全集》为依据，其实中文版只是“桥梁”，它的意义在于将我们引向原文。

Social evolutionism was the first theoretical form of Marxist philosophy in China. Darwin’s theory of evolution provided a natural-scientific basis for Marx’s theory of class struggle, but the latter is by no means a simple application of the former in the social domain, nor is Marxism any kind of Social Darwinism. Historical materialism can be regarded as a kind of social evolutionism, especially in terms of its description of the process of historical development, but comparatively speaking, the name “social progressivism” is more appropriate. The fundamental difference between evolution and progress lies in the existence or absence of a target reference point. Evolution has no clear goal, whereas progress does. The social evolutionist form of Marxist philosophy entered China with *Datongxue*, merged with the historical materialist form after 1919, and continued until the failure of the Great Revolution [8]8 The Great Revolution refers to the first Kuomintang-Communist united front period (1924–1927), which ended with the KMT’s purge of Communists., lasting for about 30 years. A question it raised recurred repeatedly during these 30 years: the relationship between the “theory of evolution” and the “theory of revolution.” Cai Hesen and Chen Duxiu once held a special discussion on this. In February 1921, while studying in France under a work-study program, Cai Hesen wrote to Chen Duxiu, editor of *New Youth*, stating that “the marrow of Marxism lies in synthesizing the theory of revolution and the theory of evolution (Révolution et évolution).” Between the theory of evolution and the synthetic theory of revolution, Cai Hesen clearly leaned toward the latter, even advocating that before capitalism flourished in China, “the proletariat should strike first to seize the advantage and avoid the harm.” Judging from Chen Duxiu’s reply, although he also agreed with the “synthetic theory of revolution,” between the theory of evolution and the synthetic theory of revolution, he clearly leaned toward the former. This tendency was consistent with his “theory of two-stage revolution” [9]9 The “theory of two-stage revolution” (erci geming lun) held that China must first complete a bourgeois-democratic revolution before a socialist revolution could occur, a position associated with Chen Duxiu..

社会进化论是马克思主义哲学在中国的第一个理论形态。达尔文的进化论为马克思主义的阶级斗争理论提供了自然科学依据，但后者绝非前者在社会领域的简单应用，马克思主义也不是任何意义上的社会达尔文主义。唯物史观可以视为某种社会进化论，特别是就它对历史发展过程的描述而言，但是比较来说，社会进步论这一名称更为恰当。进化与进步的根本区别在于是否存在目标参照物。进化没有明确的目标，而进步则有。马克思主义哲学的社会进化论形态随着《大同学》进入中国，1919年后与唯物史观形态合流，并一直持续到大革命失败，差不多存续了30年的时间。它提出的一个问题在这30年中反复出现，那就是“进化说”与“革命说”的关系。蔡和森与陈独秀曾对此专门展开讨论。1921年2月，尚在法国勤工俭学的蔡和森给《新青年》主编陈独秀写信，称“马克思主义的骨髓在综合革命说与进化说（Revolution et evolution）”。在进化说与综合革命说之间，蔡和森明显偏向于后者，甚至主张在资本主义勃然而兴于中国之前，“无产阶级先发制人，取其利而避其害”。从陈独秀的复信来看，虽然他也同意“综合革命说”，但在进化说和综合革命说之间，他明显偏向于前者。这种倾向与他的“二次革命论”是一致的。

II. The “Theory of Two-Stage Revolution” under the Influence of the “Two Inevitables” [10]10 The “Two Inevitables” (liang ge jue bu hui) refers to Marx’s statement in the preface to *A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy* that no social order ever perishes before all the productive forces for which there is room have developed, and new, higher relations of production never appear before the material conditions for their existence have matured in the womb of the old society.

二、“两个决不会”影响下的“二次革命论”

Chen Duxiu believed that the development of human history follows definite laws, advancing along a definite path, direction, and ladder of stages that cannot be skipped, and that China could hardly be an exception. The successive changes and development of “human methods of livelihood,” moving from the simple to the complex, brought about successive changes and development of different economic organizations, and all social organizations evolved accordingly. Human society progresses from the “era of nomadic chieftains” to the “feudal era,” the “bourgeois era,” and then the “proletarian era”; the evolution of these eras is a historical necessity that human force cannot obstruct. Although in spatial terms different peoples “differ vastly in the speed of their evolution,” in temporal terms “the course of evolution invariably proceeds in sequence without error.” From these expositions, it is beyond doubt that Chen Duxiu adhered to the basic viewpoint of historical materialism concerning the determination of relations of production by productive forces and of the superstructure by the economic base. However, his understanding of historical materialism exhibited a clear tendency toward mechanization. “We believe that only objective material causes can change society, can explain history, can dominate the outlook on life; this is the ‘materialist conception of history.’” The “material” in “materialist” was interpreted as “only,” and the core meaning of “objective material causes,” i.e., “matter,” was interpreted as “economy,” so that “historical materialism” became “economic determinism.” Under conditions where material conditions (economic conditions) were not yet mature, “if we delude ourselves that the power of our propaganda alone can overthrow the warlords, can create a popular revolution, can break international capitalism, then how can we even be worthy of speaking of historical materialism!”

陈独秀认为，人类历史的发展遵循一定规律，沿着一定道路、方向、阶梯进化，不能躐等，中国也难以独异。“人类治生方法”的次第变更发展，由简单而复杂，造成了不同的经济组织的次第变更发展，社会一切组织亦随之进化。人类社会由“游牧酋长时代”到“封建时代”“资产阶级时代”，再到“无产阶级时代”，这些时代的演进是历史的必然，非人力可以阻挡。虽然在空间上各民族“进化之迟速大相悬绝”，但是在时间上“进化的历程恒次第不爽”。从这些论述来看，陈独秀无疑坚持了马克思主义关于生产力决定生产关系、经济基础决定上层建筑的唯物史观基本观点。但是，他对唯物史观的理解具有明显的机械化倾向。“我们相信只有客观的物质原因可以变动社会，可以解释历史，可以支配人生观，这便是‘唯物的历史观’”。“唯物”的“唯”被解释为“只有”，“客观的物质原因”即“物”的核心要义被解释为“经济”，所以“唯物史观”即“经济史观”。在物质条件（经济条件）没有成熟的情况下，“如果我们妄想我们的宣传他本身的力量可以打倒军阀，可以造成平民革命，可以打破国际资本主义，我们还配谈什么唯物史观！”

Like other Chinese Marxists of that era, Chen Duxiu had access to very limited classical Marxist works (in translation, including abridged translations). In a speech titled “Marx’s Doctrine” (April 23, 1922), he mentioned three works introducing historical materialism: *The Poverty of Philosophy*, *The Communist Manifesto*, and the “Preface to *A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy*.” One passage deserves close attention, as it clearly comes from the “Preface to *A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy*”: “…a social system never collapses until the productive forces within that system have no further room for development. New systems cannot be born before the material conditions for their existence have been fully established within the womb of the old system, or at least until they are in the process of being established.” The current translation reads: “No social order is ever destroyed before all the productive forces for which it is sufficient have been developed, and new superior relations of production never replace older ones before the material conditions for their existence have matured within the framework of the old society.” By comparing these two passages, we can discover an interesting instance of appropriation. The meaning “or at least until they are in the process of being established” is absent from the original. Presumably, in Chen Duxiu’s view, Marx had spoken too fully and too absolutely, so a “correction” needed to be added.

同那个时代中国的其他马克思主义者一样，陈独秀能读到的马克思经典著作（译本，包括节译本）非常有限。在题为《马克思学说》（1922年4月23日）的演讲中，他提到介绍唯物史观的三种著作：《哲学的贫困》《共产党宣言》和《〈政治经济学批判〉序言》。其中一段文字值得高度注意，它明显来自《〈政治经济学批判〉序言》：“……一个社会制度，非到了生产力在其制度内更无发展之余地时，决不会崩坏。新制度之物质的生存条件，在旧制度的母胎内未完全成立以前，决不能产生，至少也须在成立过程中才能产生。”现在的译文是：“无论哪一个社会形态，在它所能容纳的全部生产力发挥出来以前，是决不会灭亡的；而新的更高的生产关系，在它的物质存在条件在旧社会的胎胞里成熟以前，是决不会出现的。”通过对比这两段文字，我们可以发现一个有趣的挪用现象。“至少也须在成立过程中才能产生”这层意思是原文没有的。大概在陈独秀看来，马克思说得太满了、太绝对了，所以要加一点“修正”。

The “two inevitables” [11]11 The “two inevitables” (两个决不会) refer to the passage from Marx’s “Preface to *A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy*” stating that no social order disappears before all its productive forces are developed, and new relations of production do not appear before their material conditions have matured. Chen Duxiu’s interpretation of this passage is discussed in the text. became the theoretical source of the “theory of two-stage revolution.” [12]12 The “theory of two-stage revolution” (二次革命论) is a term used in CPC historiography to describe Chen Duxiu’s position that China must first complete a bourgeois democratic revolution under bourgeois leadership, develop capitalism fully, and only then proceed to a socialist revolution led by the proletariat. “We are not utopian socialists; we do not fantasize about leaping from a semi-feudal society directly to a socialist society without passing through capitalism.” Chen Duxiu believed that China’s feudal system had already severely hindered the development of productive forces, and with the addition of imperialist aggression, this system was certainly unsustainable. China’s industry was not yet developed; the working class was not only very immature in quantity but also very immature in quality. Therefore, the working class was merely an important element in the national revolution, not an independent revolutionary force. “The revolutionary bourgeoisie leads, unites with the revolutionary proletariat, and realizes the bourgeois democratic revolution.” After a revolution of a bourgeois character, the capitalist system would be established, and since this system could not be overthrown until all the productive forces it could accommodate had been developed, the proletariat would have to wait, and wait until the material conditions for socialist relations of production had matured within the womb of the old society, or, in Chen Duxiu’s phrasing, at least until they were in the process of maturing. Only then would conditions for a socialist revolution exist.

“两个决不会”成为“二次革命论”的理论来源。“我们不是乌托邦的社会主义者，决不幻想不经过资本主义，而可以由半封建的社会一跳便到社会主义的社会。”陈独秀认为，中国的封建制社会已经严重阻碍了生产力的发展，再加上帝国主义的侵略，所以这种制度肯定是保持不住的。中国产业还未发达，工人阶级不但在数量上很幼稚，而且在质量上也很幼稚，因此工人阶级在国民革命中只是重要分子，而不是独立的革命势力。“统率革命的资产阶级，联合革命的无产阶级，实现资产阶级的民主革命。”经过资产阶级性质的革命，资本主义制度得以建立，而这种制度在它所容纳的全部生产力发挥出来以前，是不可能被推翻的，所以无产阶级还要等待，一直等到社会主义生产关系的物质条件在旧社会的胎胞里成熟，或者按照陈独秀的说法，至少在成熟的过程中，那时才会有社会主义革命的条件。

How should we understand the “two stages” in the “theory of two-stage revolution”? “Two stages” clearly refers to the two revolutions: the “bourgeois revolution” and the “proletarian revolution.” Can the proposition that these two revolutions are necessary to go from feudal society to socialist society be called the “theory of two-stage revolution”? Obviously not. The key here lies in the leadership of the bourgeois revolution and whether capitalist society undergoes full development between the two revolutions. If the bourgeoisie launches a revolution, seizes state power, develops capitalism, and after full development the proletariat launches a revolution, seizes state power, and builds socialism, then this is a typical “two-stage revolution.” If there is insufficient time, then there is no full development of capitalism; without full development of capitalism, there can be no talk of a “two-stage revolution.” In Russia, from the February Revolution to the October Revolution in 1917, only a little over half a year elapsed. In that time, full development of capitalism was impossible; moreover, the leader of both revolutions was the Bolshevik Party. Therefore, the Russian revolution was not a “two-stage revolution” but a “permanent revolution.” [13]13 “Permanent revolution” (不断革命) here refers to Leon Trotsky’s theory, which argued that in backward countries like Russia, the bourgeois democratic revolution could and should be led by the proletariat and immediately transition into a socialist revolution, without an intervening period of capitalist development.

如何理解“二次革命论”中的“二次”？“二次”显然指“资产阶级性质革命”与“无产阶级性质革命”这两次。由封建社会到社会主义社会必须经过这两次革命的主张，是不是可以称为“二次革命论”呢？显然不可以。这里的关键在于资产阶级性质革命的领导权和两次革命之间资本主义社会是不是经过了充分发展。如果资产阶级发动革命夺取政权，然后搞资本主义，经过充分发展后，无产阶级再发动革命夺取政权，搞社会主义，那么这是典型的“二次革命”。如果没有充分的时间保证，那么就没有资本主义的充分发展；如果没有资本主义的充分发展，那么就谈不上“二次革命”。俄国1917年二月革命到十月革命，中间只有半年多的时间。在这段时间里，不可能有资本主义的充分发展，加之两次革命的领导者都是布尔什维克党，所以俄国革命并不是“二次革命”，而是“不断革命”。

The “Manifesto of the Second National Congress of the Communist Party of China” [14]14 The Second National Congress of the CPC was held in July 1922 in Shanghai. Its manifesto outlined the Party’s immediate program for a democratic revolution against imperialism and feudalism, and its ultimate goal of socialism. (hereinafter referred to as the “Manifesto”) was a product guided by the “theory of two-stage revolution.” “If the democratic revolution succeeds, the proletariat will gain only some freedoms and rights, but will still not be completely liberated. Moreover, with the success of democracy, the immature bourgeoisie will develop rapidly and enter into an antagonistic position with the proletariat. Therefore, the proletariat must then deal with the bourgeoisie and carry out the second step of struggle: ‘the dictatorship of the proletariat united with the poor peasants.’” However, the “Manifesto” also preserved the possibility of the bourgeois democratic revolution “taking a sharp turn”: “If the organizational strength and combat effectiveness of the proletariat are robust, this second step of struggle can succeed immediately after the victory of the democratic revolution.” In his article “The Chinese National Revolution and the Social Classes,” Chen Duxiu expressed a similar idea: “Under ordinary circumstances, the bourgeoisie will naturally seize state power; but if there is a special environment at that time, there may be new changes. How much state power the working class can obtain at that time will depend on the degree of the working class’s efforts in the revolution and on the world situation.”

《中国共产党第二次全国代表大会宣言》（以下简称《宣言》）是“二次革命论”指导下的产物。“民主主义革命成功了，无产阶级不过得着一些自由与权利，还是不能完全解放。而且民主主义成功，幼稚的资产阶级便会迅速发展，与无产阶级处于对抗地位。因此无产阶级便须对付资产阶级，实行‘与贫苦农民联合的无产阶级专政’的第二步奋斗。”但是，《宣言》也保留了资产阶级民主革命“急转直下”的可能性：“如果无产阶级的组织力和战斗力强固，这第二步奋斗是能跟着民主主义革命胜利以后即刻成功的。”在《中国国民革命与社会各阶级》一文中，陈独秀表达了类似的思想：“在普通形势之下，自然是资产阶级握得政权；但彼时若有特殊的环境，也许有新的变化，工人阶级在彼时能获得若干政权，乃视工人阶级在革命中的努力至何程度及世界的形势而决定。”

Chen Duxiu regarded historical materialism (the theory of evolution) and the Russian path (the theory of revolution) as two different things. One was Marx’s bequeathed teaching, the other a real-world successful example. Which one to believe? He often vacillated between historical materialism and the Russian path, or, in other words, between the “theory of two-stage revolution” and the “theory of permanent revolution,” to the point that his expositions occasionally contained self-contradictions. This “vacillation” had both external causes, such as pressure and influence from the Comintern, and internal causes (the main causes), such as his understanding of the “two inevitables” as universally applicable truths. Overall, the “theory of two-stage revolution” occupied the dominant position (especially in his later years). Although the Chinese revolution might take a sharp turn, “this future opportunity is not something we can anticipate, nor is it necessary to anticipate; for now, we must single-mindedly carry out the national revolution.”

陈独秀把唯物史观（进化说）与俄国道路（革命说）看作两种不同的东西。一个是马克思的遗教，一个是现实的成功范例。相信哪一个？他经常摇摆于唯物史观与俄国道路之间，或者说，摇摆于“二次革命论”与“不断革命论”之间，以至于他的论述不时出现一些自相矛盾的地方。“摇摆”既有外在的原因，如共产国际的施压和影响，也有内在的原因（主要的原因），如他把“两个决不会”理解为放之四海而皆准的真理。总的来说，“二次革命论”占据了主导地位（到了晚年尤为如此）。虽然中国革命也许会出现急转直下的局面，但是“这种未来的机会我们没有预计的可能，也并没有预计的必要，现在只有一心不乱的干国民革命”。

Does historical materialism conflict with the Russian path? Does the “theory of the two-stage revolution” [15]15 The “theory of the two-stage revolution” (二次革命论) refers to the view that the Chinese revolution must first complete the bourgeois-democratic stage before transitioning to the socialist stage, with no possibility of telescoping the two stages. conflict with the “theory of permanent revolution”? The key to answering these two questions (in fact, two aspects of the same question) lies in clarifying the distinction between the strong program and the weak program of historical materialism. The “two inevitabilities” [16]16 The “two inevitabilities” (两个决不会) are Marx’s dictum from the 1859 Preface to *A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy*: “No social order is ever destroyed before all the productive forces for which it is sufficient have been developed, and new superior relations of production never replace older ones before the material conditions for their existence have matured within the framework of the old society.” constitute the strong program of historical materialism, but they are not applicable to Russia. In his letter (and drafts) to Vera Zasulich, Marx clearly stated that the “historical inevitability” of the capitalist movement analyzed in *Capital* is “expressly limited to the countries of Western Europe.” [17]17 Karl Marx, “Drafts of the Letter to Vera Zasulich,” *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, vol. 24 (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1989), p. 346. One noteworthy detail is that Marx placed emphasis marks under “the countries of Western Europe,” both in the drafts and in the formal reply letter. This is equivalent to saying that outside Western Europe, whether the “theory of the five modes of production” [18]18 The “theory of the five modes of production” (五形态论) is the Soviet-Marxist schema of historical stages: primitive communism, slavery, feudalism, capitalism, and communism (socialism). is applicable depends on the specific historical circumstances. Mikhailovsky’s insistence on turning Marx’s historical outline of the origin of capitalism in Western Europe into a general historical-philosophical theory of a universal path of development was strongly criticized by Marx. Reflecting on the development paths of Russia and other non-Western European regions, Marx proposed the weak program of historical materialism: “Events strikingly analogous but taking place in different historical milieus led to totally different results. By studying each of these evolutions separately and then comparing them, one can easily find the key to understanding this phenomenon.” [19]19 Karl Marx, “The Method of Political Economy,” in *Grundrisse* (Penguin, 1973), p. 105; the quotation is adapted from Marx’s 1877 letter to the editorial board of *Otechestvennye Zapiski*. This means that historical materialism does not provide a “master key”; its truth is “one key opens one lock.”

唯物史观与俄国道路冲突吗？“二次革命论”与“不断革命论”冲突吗？回答这两个问题（其实是一个问题的两个方面）的关键，是弄清楚唯物史观的强纲领和弱纲领之分。“两个决不会”是唯物史观的强纲领，但并不适用于俄国。在给查苏利奇的复信（以及草稿）中，马克思清楚地表明，《资本论》中所分析的资本主义运动的“历史必然性”，“明确地限制在西欧各国的范围内”。有一个细节值得注意，马克思在“西欧各国”的下面加了着重号，无论在草稿中，还是在正式的复信中，都是这样。这等于说，在西欧以外的地区，“五形态论”是不是适用，要看具体的历史环境。米海洛夫斯基一定要把马克思关于西欧资本主义起源的历史概述彻底变成一般发展道路的历史哲学理论，遭到了马克思的强烈批评。在反思俄国以及其他非西欧地区发展道路的基础上，马克思提出了唯物史观的弱纲领：“极为相似的事变发生在不同的历史环境中就引起了完全不同的结果。如果把这些演变中的每一个都分别加以研究，然后再把它们加以比较，我们就会很容易地找到理解这种现象的钥匙”。这意味着，唯物史观并不提供“万能钥匙”，它的真理是“一把钥匙开一把锁”。

The “theory of permanent revolution” is a theory proposed by Marx and Engels when exploring the revolutionary path of relatively backward Germany (compared with Britain and France). As early as in the *Principles of Communism*, Engels expressed the preliminary idea of “permanent revolution”: “The Communists must help the bourgeoisie to achieve political power as quickly as possible, so that they can then overthrow it as quickly as possible.” [20]20 Friedrich Engels, *Principles of Communism*, Question 18. This idea was continued and implemented in the *Communist Manifesto*. Marx and Engels explicitly proposed the “theory of permanent revolution” in the *Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League* (March 1850). This document points out that the democratic petty bourgeoisie hopes to quickly end the revolution once their demands are met, “while our interest and our task are to make the revolution permanent until all the more or less propertied classes have been driven from their ruling positions, until the proletariat has conquered state power, and until the association of the proletarians has progressed, not only in one country but in all the dominant countries of the world, to the point where competition among the proletarians in these countries ceases and at least the decisive productive forces are concentrated in the hands of the proletarians.” [21]21 Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, *Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League*, March 1850. “Permanent revolution” has three basic meanings: the uninterruptedness of the democratic revolution’s transition to the socialist revolution, the uninterruptedness of the socialist revolution, and the uninterruptedness of the international revolution. It is a theory of Marx and Engels, and also a theory of Lenin. It was precisely under the guidance of the “theory of permanent revolution” that the Russian revolution achieved success. Of course, the Russian version of the “theory of permanent revolution” had its own characteristics.

“不断革命论”是马克思、恩格斯在探讨相对落后的德国（较之于英法）革命道路时提出的理论。早在《共产主义原理》中，恩格斯就表达了初步的“不断革命论”思想：“共产主义者为了本身的利益必须帮助资产阶级尽快地取得统治，以便尽快地再把它推翻。”该思想在《共产党宣言》中得到延续和贯彻。马克思、恩格斯明确提出“不断革命论”是在《共产主义者同盟中央委员会告同盟书》（1850年3月）中。这篇文献指出，民主派小资产者希望在他们的要求实现后赶快结束革命，“而我们的利益和我们的任务却是要不断革命，直到把一切大大小小的有产阶级的统治全都消灭，直到无产阶级夺得国家政权，直到无产者的联合不仅在一个国家内，而且在世界一切举足轻重的国家内都发展到使这些国家的无产者之间的竞争停止，至少是发展到使那些有决定意义的生产力集中到了无产者手中”。“不断革命”有三层基本含义：民主革命过渡到社会主义革命的不断性，社会主义革命的不断性以及国际革命的不断性。它是马克思、恩格斯的理论，也是列宁的理论。正是在“不断革命论”的指导下，俄国革命才取得了成功。当然，俄国版的“不断革命论”带有自己的特点。

III. Dialectical Materialism Lays the Logical Premise for the Two Integrations

三、唯物辩证法为“两个结合”奠定逻辑前提

The Chinese-translated text opened up a new space of meaning, and its divergence in meaning from the original text made Marxism a “Chinese-transmitted Marxism,” but it was not yet sufficient to make it “Sinicized Marxism.” According to the author’s understanding, Sinicized Marxism is Marxism that, through the creative transformation and innovative development of the Chinese-language world, has acquired Chinese characteristics, Chinese style, and Chinese manner. It should take the emergence of original achievements as its primary hallmark. In the history of the Sinicization of Marxist philosophy, 1927 is an important node. Before this, the Marxist philosophical systems popular in China were the theory of social evolution and the system of historical materialism; thereafter, the popular system became dialectical materialism and historical materialism. In 1923, Qu Qiubai, after returning from the Soviet Union, offered relevant courses at Shanghai University, systematically lecturing on Soviet Marxist philosophy, and explicitly stated that dialectical materialism (the philosophy of mutual dialectics) is the methodology of all social sciences. In the political atmosphere of “wholeheartedly carrying out the national revolution,” this new philosophy did not become the ideological weapon for the Communist Party to understand and transform the world, nor did it enter the lives of ordinary people. It was not until 1927 that the situation fundamentally changed. The great prevalence of dialectical materialism that began in 1927 laid the ideological foundation and logical premise for the Two Integrations, making the originality of Chinese Marxism possible. Therefore, it can be called the first year of Chinese Marxist philosophy and the first year of Chinese Marxism. Guo Zhanbo commented: “Since 1927, social sciences in China have surged like a storm, and the thought of dialectical materialism has advanced with the momentum of a thousand miles a day”; dialectical materialism replaced Dewey’s experimental logic and Russell’s mathematical logic, becoming the “new method of thought.” [22]22 Guo Zhanbo, *A History of Chinese Thought in the Past Fifty Years* (1935), p. 234. Tan Fuzhi summarized: “In the short period from 1928 to 1932, apart from the slogan of proletarian literature, it was the introduction of dialectical materialism and historical materialism. This was the golden age of the new book industry. At this time, if a teacher or a student did not have a few books by Marx on their bookshelf, they would always be looked down upon.” [23]23 Tan Fuzhi, “The Current Situation of Chinese Philosophy,” *Reading and Living* 1, no. 3 (1936). Ai Siqi recalled: “In 1927, the torrent of dialectical materialism swept across the whole country,” “overshadowed the entire ideological world,” and opened “a new era of Chinese philosophy”; “scholars all recognized this as the foundation of any knowledge, whether studying sociology, economics, archaeology, or engaging in literary theory, all saw a new dawn in this philosophical foundation.” [24]24 Ai Siqi, “Twenty-Two Years of Chinese Philosophy,” *Chinese Culture* 1, no. 1 (1940). According to Ai Siqi’s periodization of the history of Chinese philosophy, 1921–1927 belonged to the “era of the problem of life,” and 1927–1930 was the “heyday of dialectical materialism.” Wu Xicen described the situation of this “heyday” as follows: the term “dialectical materialism” “became the most popular fashionable term in Chinese intellectual circles. People engaged in social sciences, whether they understood it or not, always liked to slap this fashionable label on their own goods in a half-baked manner to attract customers.” [25]25 Wu Xicen, “The Dialectical Materialism of Bukharin,” *New Life* 1, no. 1 (1928). From 1927 to 1938, that is, from the failure of the Great Revolution [26]26 The Great Revolution (大革命) refers to the first united front period of the Kuomintang and the Communist Party (1924–1927), which ended with the KMT’s violent purge of Communists in April 1927. to the period before Stalin’s *On Dialectical and Historical Materialism* entered China, a period of dialectical materialism or dialectical materialism emerged in the history of Chinese Marxist philosophy. At this time, people generally referred to Marxist philosophy by these two names and incorporated historical materialism into the Marxist philosophical system named by these two names, which sufficiently reflected the transformation of the form of Marxist philosophy.

汉译文本打开了新的意义空间，它与原文的意义分殊使得马克思主义成为“汉传马克思主义”，但还不足以使其成为“中国化马克思主义”。按照笔者的理解，中国化马克思主义是原生形态马克思主义经过汉语世界的创造性转化与创新性发展而形成的具有中国特色、中国风格、中国气派的马克思主义，应该以原创性成果的出现为首要标志。在马克思主义哲学中国化的历史上，1927年是个重要的节点。在此之前，中国流行的马克思主义哲学体系是社会进化论体系和唯物史观体系，自此以后，流行的则是辩证唯物主义和历史唯物主义体系。1923年，瞿秋白自苏联回国后在上海大学开设了相关课程，系统讲授苏联马克思主义哲学，明确提出辩证唯物主义（互辩律的哲学）是一切社会科学的方法论。在“一心不乱的干国民革命”的政治氛围中，这种新哲学并没有成为共产党认识世界、改造世界的思想武器，更没有走进普通民众的生活。到了1927年，情况才发生了根本改变。1927年开启的唯物辩证法的大流行为“两个结合”奠定了思想基础和逻辑前提，使得中国马克思主义的原创性成为可能，故可以称为中国马克思主义哲学元年以及中国马克思主义元年。郭湛波评论：“中国自一九二七年社会科学风起云涌，辩证唯物论的思想大有一日千里之势”；唯物辩证法取代了杜威的实验论理学和罗素的数学逻辑，成为“新思想方法”。谭辅之总结：“一九二八至一九三二年一短短的时期中，除了普罗文学的口号而外，便是唯物辩证法和唯物史观之介绍。这是新书业的黄金时代。在这时，一个教员或一个学生书架上如果没有几本马克斯的书，总要被人瞧不起的。”艾思奇回顾：“1927年，辩证法唯物论的洪流席卷了全国”，“掩蔽了全思想界”，开启了“中国哲学的新时代”；“学者都公认这是一切任何学问的基础，不论研究社会学、经济学、考古学，或从事文艺理论者，都在这哲学基础中看见了新的曙光”。按照艾思奇对中国哲学史的分期，1921—1927年属“人生问题时代”，1927—1930年是“唯物辩证法的极盛时代”。吴西岑如此描述“极盛时代”的状况：“辩证唯物论”这个名词，“成为中国思想界一个最流行的时髦名词了，治社会科学的人，无论懂与不懂，总喜欢生吞活剥地把这个时髦商标贴在自己的货色上，以求兜揽顾客”。1927—1938年，也就是从大革命失败到斯大林的《论辩证唯物主义和历史唯物主义》进入中国之前的这段时间，中国马克思主义哲学史上出现了一个辩证（法）唯物论时期或唯物辩证法时期。此时，人们普遍以这两个名称称呼马克思主义哲学，并且把历史唯物主义纳入以这两个名称命名的马克思主义哲学体系，足以体现出马克思主义哲学形态的转换。

So, why did dialectical materialism sweep across the country in 1927? At its root, it arose from the philosophical reflection on the failure of the Great Revolution. Tan Fuzhi pointed out: “After 1927, the path of political activity hit a wall, so many people turned to the path of academic thought. Indeed, action comes first, and thought comes later. When it came to thinking and reflecting, one felt that political movement was inseparable from theoretical work. At this time, one also deeply felt that the old theories had become decayed and unusable, so people flocked to introduce emerging philosophy and social sciences.” [27]27 Tan Fuzhi, “The Current Situation of Chinese Philosophy,” *Reading and Living* 1, no. 3 (1936). Wang Duqing also held the same view: “The Great Revolution of 1927 taught the general public many lessons, and the advanced intellectuals revealed an attempt to review the past revolution. However, to achieve this goal, it was necessary to first establish a basic theory.” [28]28 Wang Duqing, “The Tasks of Chinese Philosophy,” *Thought Monthly* 1, no. 1 (1935). The failure of the Great Revolution made the Chinese Communists realize that to solve the problem of “where is China going,” relying solely on historical materialism was insufficient. It was necessary to grasp Marxist philosophy more completely, to use dialectical materialism to analyze China’s actual society, to form truthful understanding, and to guide practice with scientific theory. The debate on the nature of Chinese society and social history, *Oppose Book Worship*, the debate between dialectical materialism and formal logic, the New Enlightenment Movement, *On Practice*, *On Contradiction*… Through this series of links, the connotation of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context became increasingly rich, and the basic path became increasingly clear.

那么，唯物辩证法为什么在1927年风靡全国？究其根本，乃起于对大革命失败的哲学反思。谭辅之指出：“自一九二七而后，政治活动的路子碰了壁，于是有许多人就转到学术思想的路上来。的确，行动在先，而思想在后。及到加以思想、反审，则感觉做政治运动是离不了理论工作。这时又深深感觉到旧的理论已成窳腐，不堪使用，于是群起介绍新兴的哲学和社会科学。”王独清也持同样看法：“一九二七年的大革命给予一般民众许多教训，前进的智识分子便露了一个对过去革命检讨的企图。不过要达到这层目的，却非先有一个基本理论的建立不可。”大革命的失败，使中国共产党人认识到，解决“中国向何处去”的问题，仅仅依靠唯物史观是不够的，必须更完整掌握马克思主义哲学才行，必须运用唯物辩证法分析中国的现实社会，形成真理性认识，以科学的理论指导实践。中国社会性质和社会史论战、《反对本本主义》、唯物辩证法和形式逻辑论战、新启蒙运动、《实践论》《矛盾论》……经过这一系列环节，马克思主义中国化的内涵越来越丰富，基本途径越来越清晰。

Peng Kang denied that historical materialism is economic determinism. He pointed out that economic determinism only vaguely acknowledges the force of economic factors, yet overlooks that humans are the true creators of history. The philosophical foundation of economic determinism is the materialism of natural science, whereas the philosophical foundation of historical materialism is dialectical materialism or materialist dialectics. In his view, “the progress of history requires the conscious action of human beings, and its concrete manifestation is that humans use labor tools to transform nature. This is the true meaning of history, and this is also the core of historical materialism.” The significance and value of historical materialism lie not merely in providing an explanation of history, but in providing the theoretical basis for “how humans create history,” which is the more important aspect. In other words, historical materialism enables us to influence history purposefully and to dominate history within a certain scope. Although dialectical materialists deny freedom of the will, they emphasize the subject position of humans in the process of social transformation and advocate elevating the initiative of human consciousness: “What is coming, hasten it to come! What is departing, hasten it to leave!” [29]29 This is a paraphrase of a line from the Chinese Marxist theorist Li Da (1890–1966), emphasizing the active role of human consciousness in historical change. Existence determines consciousness; materialist dialectics is both the method by which the objective world operates and the method for thinking about the world and taking action. According to the requirements of materialist dialectics, one should study the connection between the Chinese revolution and the world revolution, study the changes and development of Chinese society, and study the concrete contradictions of Chinese society. Commendably, Peng Kang had already noted the significance of the categories of universality and particularity for the Chinese revolution. Materialist dialectics “makes a concrete analysis based on specific circumstances, but is not confined to particularity, to the point of neglecting its necessary connection with other phenomena and forgetting its totality—it is not ‘seeing the trees but not the forest.’”

彭康否认唯物史观是经济史观。他指出，经济史观只泛泛地承认经济要素的势力，却忽略了人是历史的真正创造者。经济史观的哲学基础是自然科学的唯物论，而唯物史观的哲学基础是辩证法的唯物论或唯物辩证法。在他看来，“历史的进展要有人类意识的行动，而具体的表现是人类用劳动器具来改变自然。这是历史真正的意义，这也是史的唯物论底核心”。唯物史观的意义和价值，绝不仅仅在于提供了对历史的解释，而且在于提供了“人类怎样创造历史”的理论基础，这也是更重要的方面。换言之，唯物史观能使我们合目的地影响历史，在一定范围内支配历史。辩证唯物主义者虽然否认意志自由，但注重人在社会变革过程中的主体地位，主张高扬人的意识的能动性，“要来的，赶紧促进它来！要去的，赶紧驱逐它去！”存在决定思维，唯物辩证法既是客观世界运行的方法，也是思考世界和采取行动的方法。根据唯物辩证法的要求，应研究中国革命与世界革命的联系，研究中国社会的变化发展，研究中国社会的具体矛盾。难能可贵的是，彭康已经注意到普遍性与特殊性这一对范畴对于中国革命的意义。唯物辩证法“根据特殊的情况做实际的分析，可是不拘束于特殊性，致忽略其与别个现象的必然的关联而忘其全体性。——它不是‘见树而不见林’”。

Cai Hesen directed his critique squarely at the “theory of two-stage revolution.” [30]30 The “theory of two-stage revolution” (二次革命论) held that the Chinese revolution must first complete a bourgeois-democratic stage under bourgeois leadership before a later socialist revolution could occur; it was associated with Chen Duxiu. In fact, this term was Cai Hesen’s own invention. He regarded Chen Duxiu as China’s Menshevik faction, [31]31 The Mensheviks were a faction of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party that opposed Lenin’s Bolsheviks; they advocated a more gradual, two-stage revolutionary path. believing there was no substantive difference between their theories. Both separated the bourgeois democratic revolution completely from the proletarian socialist revolution, inserting a fully developed capitalist society in between; both held that the socialist revolution must wait until economic conditions matured, lacking the concept of a transition from the democratic revolution to the socialist revolution. From Cai Hesen’s analysis, it can be seen that the Menshevik error lay in mechanically applying Marx’s conclusions about the Western European path to Russia. Could China’s transition from the democratic revolution to the socialist revolution be as rapid as Russia’s? Cai Hesen gave a negative answer to this. “In colonies or semi-colonies such as China and India, the peasantry occupies the most important position, there are still serious feudal remnants, the degree of capitalist development is low, and it is insufficient to build socialism independently—the help of advanced socialist countries is needed. Therefore, the transition from the democratic revolution to the socialist revolution in these places cannot be mechanically imagined as in Russia.” Accordingly, Cai Hesen also criticized the “theory of one-stage revolution” advocated by Qu Qiubai, which called for a direct leap from the democratic revolution to socialism, [32]32 Qu Qiubai (1899–1935) was an early leader of the CPC who advocated a “one-stage revolution” directly from the democratic to the socialist revolution, bypassing a separate bourgeois stage. calling this theory “confusing the nature of the Chinese revolution” and “confusing the tasks of the proletarian party’s minimum program (worker-peasant democratic dictatorship) and its maximum program (proletarian dictatorship).”

蔡和森将批判的矛头直指“二次革命论”。实际上，这一术语正是蔡和森的发明。他把陈独秀视为中国的孟什维克派，认为两者的理论没有实质性差别。两者都把资产阶级民权革命与无产阶级社会革命截然分开，中间横插一个充分发展的资本主义社会，都认为社会主义革命需等到经济条件成熟以后进行，而缺乏从民权革命转变为社会主义革命的观念。从蔡和森的分析可以看出，孟什维克的错误在于把马克思关于西欧道路的论断照搬于俄国。中国从民权革命转变到社会主义革命，是否可以像俄国那样快呢？对此，蔡和森给予了否定的回答。“殖民地或半殖民地如中国与印度，农民占最重要的地位，还有严重的封建残余，资本主义发展的程度低，不够独立的建设社会主义，必须社会主义先进国的帮助，所以这些地方从民权革命转变到社会主义不能机械的想像如俄国一样”。据此，蔡和森对瞿秋白主张的由民权革命直达社会主义的“一次革命论”也进行了批评，称这种理论“混淆中国革命的性质”，“混淆无产阶级政党最低度党纲（工农民权独裁的）与最高度党纲（无产阶级专政的）的任务”。

At the August 7th Meeting, [33]33 The August 7th Meeting (1927) was an emergency meeting of the CPC that ended Chen Duxiu’s leadership and adopted a policy of armed resistance against the Kuomintang. Mao Zedong emphasized the importance of leadership, military affairs, and the peasant question, and resolutely raised the slogan “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun,” reflecting new thinking on the path of the Chinese revolution. Thereafter, using materialist dialectics as his weapon, he continuously broke down dogmatism, promoted a “Copernican reversal” in the relationship between classical theory and reality, combined the basic principles of Marxism with China’s concrete reality and with the fine traditional Chinese culture, and creatively put forward the ideological line of “seeking truth from facts” and the theory of New Democracy. The theory of New Democratic Revolution holds that the Chinese revolution proceeds in two steps: first the new-democratic revolution, then the socialist revolution. “The first prepares the conditions for the second, and the two stages must be linked; no bourgeois dictatorship stage may be inserted between them—this is correct, this is the Marxist theory of revolutionary development.” The theory of revolutionary development is a combination of the theory of stages of revolution and the theory of permanent revolution. The theory of New Democratic society, based on the nature and level of China’s productive forces and on China’s international environment, planned a complete set of economic, political, and cultural programs for a Chinese-style new democratic society. The reason Mao Zedong was able to successfully adapt Marxism to the Chinese context was that “he dared to make bold theoretical creations, discarding certain outdated individual principles and conclusions in Marxist theory that were unsuitable for China’s specific environment, and replacing them with new principles and conclusions suited to China’s historical environment.”

在八七会议上，毛泽东强调领导权问题、军事问题和农民问题的重要性，响亮地提出“须知政权是由枪杆子中取得的”，体现了对中国革命道路的新思考。此后，他以唯物辩证法为武器，不断破除教条主义，推动经典理论与现实的关系实现了“哥白尼式反转”，把马克思主义基本原理同中国具体实际相结合、同中华优秀传统文化相结合，创造性地提出了“实事求是”的思想路线和新民主主义理论。新民主主义革命论主张中国革命分两步走，先是新民主主义革命，然后是社会主义革命。“第一个为第二个准备条件，而两个阶段必须衔接，不容横插一个资产阶级专政的阶段，这是正确的，这是马克思主义的革命发展论。”革命发展论是革命阶段论与不断革命论的结合。新民主主义社会论立足于中国社会的生产力性质和水平，立足于中国所处的国际环境，规划了一整套中国特色的新民主主义社会经济、政治、文化纲领。毛泽东之所以能够成功地将马克思主义中国化，就在于“他在理论上敢于进行大胆的创造，抛弃马克思主义理论中某些已经过时的、不适合于中国具体环境的个别原理和个别结论，而代之以适合于中国历史环境的新原理和新结论”。

It is noteworthy that traditional Chinese dialectics also contributed to adapting Marxism to the Chinese context. The dialectics in traditional Chinese philosophy and Marxist dialectics share many similarities and common concepts; broadly speaking, they can also be classified as a form of materialist dialectics. The mainstream mode of thinking in Chinese philosophy is dialectical thinking, while the mainstream mode of thinking in Western philosophy is formal logical thinking. Therefore, Marxist philosophy, which excels in dialectical thinking, has a certain natural affinity with traditional Chinese philosophy. The concept of change in traditional Chinese dialectics helps to break down superstition about classical theory. “Production and reproduction are what is called change” (The Book of Changes, “Appended Remarks, Part I”); “When a situation reaches its extremity, change occurs; with change, continuity is achieved; with continuity, duration is achieved” (The Book of Changes, “Appended Remarks, Part II”). When classical theory encounters failure in the face of reality, it needs to be reformed and innovated; only in this way can its vitality be maintained. Ai Siqi understood adapting Marxism to the Chinese context as a cause of creating Marxism under China’s special conditions. [34]34 Ai Siqi (1910–1966) was a prominent Chinese Marxist philosopher known for popularizing dialectical materialism. Traditional Chinese dialectics, as a “transcendental structure,” participated in shaping the Chinese form of Marxist philosophy. For example, Mao Zedong believed that among the three laws of materialist dialectics, the law of the unity of opposites is fundamental, the essence of dialectics, and that the other laws and categories can all be reduced to the law of the unity of opposites. This reveals the influence of the way of yin and yang in traditional Chinese dialectics on Mao Zedong.

值得注意的是，中国传统辩证法也为马克思主义中国化做出了贡献。中国传统哲学中的辩证法和马克思主义辩证法有很多类似之处，共享很多观念，从大的方面来说也可以归为某种形式的唯物辩证法。中国哲学的主流思维方式是辩证思维，西方哲学的主流思维方式是形式逻辑思维。所以，以辩证思维见长的马克思主义哲学与中国传统哲学有某种天然的亲和力。中国传统辩证法的变易观念有助于破除对经典理论的迷信。“生生之谓易”（《周易·系辞上》），“穷则变，变则通，通则久”（《周易·系辞下》）。当经典理论在现实面前遭遇了失败，就需要对其革故鼎新、发展创新，只有这样，才能保持它的生命力。艾思奇就把马克思主义中国化理解为一项在中国特殊条件下创造马克思主义的事业。中国传统辩证法作为“先验结构”参与了马克思主义哲学中国形态的塑造。比如，毛泽东认为，在唯物辩证法的三大规律中，对立统一规律是根本的，是辩证法的本质，其他规律和范畴都可以归结为对立统一规律。从中可以看出中国传统辩证法中的阴阳之道对毛泽东的影响。

The “Two Integrations” did not proceed synchronously. The Second Integration was clearly later than the first. As is well known, from its founding the Communist Party of China had maintained a generally critical attitude toward traditional culture, and it was not until October 1938 that Mao Zedong proposed the idea of inheriting the legacy from Confucius to Sun Yat-sen. [35]35 This refers to Mao’s report “The Role of the Chinese Communist Party in the National War” at the Sixth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC. A very important turning point in this was the “New Enlightenment Movement” that arose in the second half of 1936. [36]36 The New Enlightenment Movement (1936–1939) was a cultural movement that sought to combine Marxist philosophy with Chinese traditional culture to resist Japanese aggression. It was a cultural salvation movement launched against the background of the Japanese invaders using superstitious, blind-following, and other dross elements of traditional Chinese culture for cultural enslavement. On the one hand, it advocated using the new philosophy (dialectical materialism) to promote the spread of scientific and democratic ideas, continuing to complete the task of enlightenment; on the other hand, it advocated excavating the positive elements of traditional culture and combining them with the new philosophy, sublating the old culture and creating a new culture. Zhang Shenfu pointed out that the slogans of the May Fourth Enlightenment Movement—“Down with the Confucian Shop” and “Science and Democracy”—were insufficient for the New Enlightenment Movement; a “turn of phrase” had to be added, changing them to “Down with the Confucian Shop, Rescue Confucius” and “Science and Democracy, First of All Self-Mastery.” [37]37 Zhang Shenfu (1893–1986) was a Chinese philosopher and early CPC member who advocated a synthesis of Marxism and Confucianism. The New Enlightenment Movement played a positive role in the CPC’s struggle for cultural leadership and in promoting the establishment of the Anti-Japanese National United Front; more importantly, it incorporated the Second Integration into the category of Sinicization.

“两个结合”并非同步进行的。第二个结合要明显晚于第一个结合。众所周知，中国共产党自成立起就一直对传统文化持总体上的批判态度，直到1938年10月，毛泽东才提出从孔夫子到孙中山的遗产都要继承的思想。这中间的一个非常重要的转折点是1936年下半年兴起的“新启蒙运动”。它是在日本侵略者利用中国传统文化中的迷信、盲从等糟粕性因素进行文化奴役的背景下开展的一场文化救亡运动。一方面，它提倡以新哲学（辩证唯物主义）促进科学与民主观念的传播，继续完成启蒙任务；另一方面，它提倡发掘传统文化中的积极因素并与新哲学相结合，扬弃旧文化，创造新文化。张申府指出，五四时代启蒙运动的口号“打倒孔家店”和“科学与民主”对新启蒙运动而言是不够的，要加上“转语”，变为“打倒孔家店，救出孔夫子”和“科学与民主，第一要自主”。新启蒙运动对中国共产党争取文化领导权以及推动抗日民族统一战线的建立发挥了积极作用，更重要的是，它把第二个结合纳入了中国化范畴。

Mao Zedong was highly adept at using Chinese idioms, allusions, aphorisms, maxims, poetry and song, folk proverbs, historical stories, and myths and legends to expound the principles of Marxist philosophy. Taking *On Practice* and *On Contradiction* as examples: “Failure is the mother of success” and “a fall into a pit, a gain in your wit” remind people that as long as they correct their thinking to conform to the laws of the external world, they can turn failure into victory; in *Romance of the Three Kingdoms*, the phrase “knitting the brows and a plan comes to mind” [38]38 “Knitting the brows and a plan comes to mind” is a phrase from the classical novel *Romance of the Three Kingdoms*, used by Mao to illustrate the mental process of forming judgments and inferences. reflects the work of using concepts to make judgments and inferences; “the scholar who stays at home knows all the world’s affairs” was an empty saying in ancient times when technology was underdeveloped, but in the modern era of advanced technology, the scholar’s “knowledge” is merely indirect experience; “how can you catch tiger cubs without entering the tiger’s lair” is a metaphor for the idea that knowledge originates from practice; “water without a source, a tree without roots” describes rational knowledge that does not rely on perceptual knowledge; “discard the dross and select the essential, eliminate the false and retain the true, proceed from one thing to another, and go from the surface to the core” describes the process of rising from perceptual knowledge to rational knowledge; “if Heaven does not change, the Way does not change either” is metaphysical thinking; “know yourself and know your enemy, and you will never be defeated in a hundred battles” and “listen to both sides and you will be enlightened, heed only one side and you will be benighted” emphasize the necessity of looking at problems comprehensively; the example of Song Jiang’s three attacks on the Zhu Family Village in *Water Margin* [39]39 *Water Margin* is a classical Chinese novel; the episode of Song Jiang’s three attacks on the Zhu Family Village is used by Mao to illustrate the need for thorough investigation before action. illustrates the importance of investigation and research; “opposites complement each other” shows that opposites have identity, and that struggle is inherent in identity; and so on.

毛泽东非常善于运用中国的成语典故、格言警句、诗词歌赋、民间谚语、历史故事、神话传说阐发马克思主义哲学的道理。以《实践论》《矛盾论》为例：“失败者成功之母”“吃一堑长一智”提醒人们，只要改正自己的思想使之符合于外界的规律性，就能变失败为胜利；《三国演义》里“眉头一皱计上心来”，背后是运用概念以做判断和推理的工夫；“秀才不出门，全知天下事”在技术不发达的古代是一句空话，在技术发达的现代，秀才的“知”只是间接经验；“不入虎穴，焉得虎子”，比喻认识来源于实践；“无源之水，无本之木”，形容那些不依赖于感性认识的理性认识；“去粗取精、去伪存真、由此及彼、由表及里”，描述从感性认识上升到理性认识的过程；“天不变，道亦不变”是形而上学思想；“知彼知己，百战不殆”“兼听则明，偏信则暗”强调必须全面看问题；《水浒传》里宋江三打祝家庄的例子说明调查研究的重要性；“相反相成”表明相反的东西有同一性，斗争性寓于同一性之中；等等。

The report of the 20th National Congress of the CPC points out: “Practice tells us that the reason why the Communist Party of China could achieve success and why socialism with Chinese characteristics could work well is, in the final analysis, that Marxism works, and that Marxism adapted to the Chinese context and the needs of the times works.” From adapting Marxism to the Chinese context to the Sinicized Marxism of the New Era, the Communist Party of China has undergone more than a hundred years of arduous exploration. The Party’s history is a history of continuously advancing the adaptation of Marxism to the Chinese context, a history of continuously advancing theoretical innovation and theoretical creation. Marxism has profoundly changed China, and China has greatly enriched Marxism. In the New Era, we must better unify upholding Marxism and developing Marxism, continue to advance the Two Integrations, [40]40 The Two Integrations refer to the integration of the basic principles of Marxism with China’s specific realities and with the best of traditional Chinese culture. endow Marxism with more Chinese characteristics, Chinese style, and Chinese manner, and write a new chapter in adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times!

党的二十大报告指出：“实践告诉我们，中国共产党为什么能，中国特色社会主义为什么好，归根到底是马克思主义行，是中国化时代化的马克思主义行。”从马克思主义中国化到新时代中国化马克思主义，中国共产党经历了百余年的艰辛探索。党的历史，就是一部不断推进马克思主义中国化的历史，就是一部不断推进理论创新、进行理论创造的历史。马克思主义深刻改变了中国，中国也极大丰富了马克思主义。在新时代，我们要更好把坚持马克思主义和发展马克思主义统一起来，继续推进“两个结合”，使马克思主义呈现出更多中国特色、中国风格、中国气派，续写马克思主义中国化时代化新篇章！

Source: *Tianjin Social Sciences*, Issue 4, 2023

文章来源：《天津社会科学》2023年第4期

Online editor: Jing Mu

网络编辑：静穆