Refuting the Fallacy that “Mao Zedong Tampered with Documents in Editing *From the Sixth Congress Onward*”

*From the Sixth Congress Onward: Secret Intra-Party Documents* (hereinafter *From the Sixth Congress Onward*) is an important collection of historical documents of the Chinese Communist Party compiled and published during the Yan’an period. Regarding the content of this book, Gao Hua’s *How Did the Red Sun Rise? The Origins and Development of the Yan’an Rectification Movement* (hereinafter “Gao’s book”) takes the struggle for power as its main interpretive thread, distorting the history of the CPC and vilifying its leading figures. It claims that in the process of editing *From the Sixth Congress Onward*, Mao Zedong deliberately highlighted himself, heavily revised some articles, and altered the dates of certain documents to conceal the truth, thereby exerting a significant negative influence in both academic circles and society at large. This article aims to refute the erroneous views in “Gao’s book” and clarify the relevant basic historical facts.

《六大以来——党内秘密文件》（以下简称《六大以来》）是延安时期编辑出版的一部重要的中国共产党历史文献集。关于该书内容，高华的《红太阳是怎样升起的——延安整风运动的来龙去脉》（以下简称“高著”）一书以权力斗争为阐释主线，歪曲解读中共历史、丑化中共领袖人物，认为毛泽东在编辑《六大以来》过程中存在刻意突出个人、对部分文章大动手术、修改个别文献日期以掩盖真相等问题，在学界乃至社会上产生了很大负面影响。本文拟批驳“高著”的上述错误观点，澄清有关基本史实。

I. On the “Claim of Highlighting the Individual”: The Number and Proportion of Mao Zedong’s Works Included in *From the Sixth Congress Onward*

一、关于“突出个人说”：《六大以来》收入毛泽东论著的篇数和占比问题

Regarding the number of articles written by Mao Zedong included in *From the Sixth Congress Onward*, Gao’s book asserts that Mao’s articles, speeches, and reports account for about one-tenth of the entire collection, arguing that this proportion is too high and excessively highlights the individual.

关于《六大以来》收入毛泽东所写文章篇数问题，高著认为，全书共收入毛泽东的文章、讲演、报告约占全书十分之一，存在比例过高、过分突出个人的问题。

Based on the number of articles and their proportion mentioned in Gao’s book, the author likely referred to the 1980 revised collected edition of *From the Sixth Congress Onward*. In fact, *From the Sixth Congress Onward* exists in two versions: a collected edition and a selected edition. The selected edition was published only once in December 1941 and was never reprinted. The collected edition, however, was revised and reprinted twice, in April 1952 and February 1980, by the General Office of the Central Committee and the Central Archives respectively, for internal distribution. According to Hu Qiaomu’s recollections, the collected edition contains 519 historical documents spanning from the Sixth National Congress of the CPC in June 1928 to November 1941. Because the content was too voluminous, Mao Zedong, during the editing process, selected 86 representative documents and compiled them into the selected edition of *From the Sixth Congress Onward*.

根据高著所提篇数及其占比，作者参考的应为1980年修订的《六大以来》汇集本。实际上，《六大以来》分汇集和选集两个版本。选集本只在1941年12月出过一版，以后没再版。汇集本则于1952年4月、1980年2月分别由中央办公厅和中央档案馆两次修订再版，内部发行。据胡乔木回忆，汇集本收录从1928年6月中共六大到1941年11月期间历史文献共519篇；由于内容过于庞杂，毛泽东在编辑过程中挑选了有代表性的文件86篇，合订成《六大以来》选集本。

Since most copies of the 1941 collected edition of *From the Sixth Congress Onward* were lost or destroyed during the war years, we can only make inferences based on available editions, the recollections of contemporaries, and existing research. According to Hu Qiaomu, compared to the 1941 edition, the tables of contents of the 1952 and 1980 editions of *From the Sixth Congress Onward* underwent four changes. First, some documents were added. The 1952 edition added five documents from the Third Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee and also added to the table of contents the titles of 31 works by Mao Zedong or documents drafted by him that had not been included in the 1941 edition but had already been included in the *Selected Works of Mao Zedong*. The 1980 edition added the *Resolution on Certain Historical Questions* adopted by the Seventh Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee and the *Decision on Economic Politics of the Chinese Soviet Republic*. Second, a few documents were deleted. The 1952 edition removed “Comrade Mao Zedong’s Conversation with Mr. Qiguang, Reporter of Yan’an’s *New China Daily*,” because this article was not actually written by Mao Zedong himself but was written and published under Mao’s name by Wang Ming. The 1980 edition removed “Comrade Mao Zedong’s Speech at the Yan’an Cadre Conference on September 14, 1939.” Third, a few documents were split. When the 1952 edition was reprinted, “Comrade Mao Zedong’s Political Report and Conclusions at the Soviet Area Representatives’ Conference” was divided into *The Tasks of the Chinese Communist Party in the Period of the War of Resistance Against Japan* and *Win the Masses in Their Millions for the Anti-Japanese National United Front*. Fourth, the titles of some documents were modified. When the 1952 edition of *From the Sixth Congress Onward* was reprinted, the titles of Mao Zedong’s works, talks, and drafted documents included in it were revised in accordance with the *Selected Works of Mao Zedong* published in the early years of the founding of the People’s Republic. For example, “Report from the Jinggangshan Front Committee to the Central Committee” was changed to *The Struggle in the Jinggang Mountains*, and “Comrade Mao Zedong’s Letter to Comrade Lin Biao” was changed to *A Single Spark Can Start a Prairie Fire* — a total of 18 such changes.

由于1941年版《六大以来》汇集本大部分在战争年代散失或销毁，现只能根据掌握的版本、当事人的回忆和现有研究综合作出推断。据胡乔木所述，相比1941年版，1952年版和1980年版《六大以来》目录存在四个变化。一是增加了部分文献。1952年版增录了5篇六届三中全会文件，并在目录中增加了1941年版没有收入但已经收入《毛泽东选集》的毛泽东著作或由他起草的文件篇名，共31篇。1980年版增录了六届七中全会通过的《关于若干历史问题的决议》和《中华苏维埃共和国关于经济政治的决定》。二是删除了个别文献。1952年版删掉了《毛泽东先生与延安〈新中华报〉记者其光先生的谈话》，因该文并非毛泽东本人所写，而是王明以毛泽东名义撰写发表的。1980年版删掉了《1939年9月14日毛泽东同志在延安干部大会上讲演》。三是对个别文献进行了拆分。1952年再版时，《毛泽东同志在苏区代表会上的政治报告及结论》被分解为《中国共产党在抗战时期的任务》和《为争取千百万群众进入抗日民族统一战线而斗争》。四是对部分文献标题作了修改。1952年《六大以来》再版时，根据新中国成立初期出版的《毛泽东选集》，对收入其中的毛泽东著作、谈话和起草的文件的标题作了修改。例如，《井冈山前委给中央的报告》改为《井冈山的斗争》，《毛泽东同志给林彪同志的信》改为《星星之火，可以燎原》，凡此18篇。

According to statistics from the 1980 edition of *From the Sixth Congress Onward* (Volumes 1 and 2), it contains a total of 557 documents, of which 61 are explicitly marked as being included in the *Selected Works of Mao Zedong*. After synthesizing all the above circumstances and calculating, it is estimated that the 1941 edition of *From the Sixth Congress Onward* contained a total of 522 documents, of which 29 were explicitly noted as articles, talks, or speeches by Mao Zedong, accounting for about 5% of the total. Considering Mao Zedong’s leadership position within the Party at the time, this proportion is not excessive.

根据1980年版《六大以来》（上、下）统计，收录文献共计557篇，其中明确标注收入《毛泽东选集》的论著61篇。通过综合以上各种情况后计算，推测1941年版《六大以来》共收录文献522篇，其中明确注明为毛泽东所作文章、谈话、演讲共29篇，占全书约5%。考虑当时毛泽东在党内的领导地位，这个比重并不算过分。

The reason this article engages in such elementary mathematical addition and subtraction is that Gao’s book insinuates that the *History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks): Short Course*’s highlighting of Stalin’s personal role gave Mao Zedong “rich inspiration” and “catered to Mao Zedong’s urgent political need to rewrite the history of the CPC with himself at the center.” In reality, the impression that editing *From the Sixth Congress Onward* was meant to highlight the individual stems from the excessive inclusion of Mao’s articles in later reprints and the relatively few works by other leaders included, thus causing misunderstanding. But this was a matter after the founding of the People’s Republic. When editing the documents in 1941, Mao Zedong “was very cautious and very strict in selecting the works of Party leaders, especially his own.” The articles by Mao included at that time “were mostly resolutions, directives, and other documents he drafted for the Central Committee (or the Soviet area Party organizations), as well as reports and conclusions he delivered at Party meetings (which was related to his special position in the Party and the army at the time).” “Very few of his signed articles were included… such as *On Practice*, *On Contradiction*, *On Protracted War*, *On New Democracy*, etc.” “However, he did not compile these articles into *From the Sixth Congress Onward*.”

本文之所以在此做如小学生式的数学加减法，是因为高著暗示，《联共（布）党史简明教程》突出斯大林个人作用给了毛泽东“丰富的启示”，“适应了毛泽东急欲重写以自己为中心的中共党史的政治需要”。实际上，通过编印《六大以来》以突出个人的印象，源于再版时过多收录毛泽东的文章，对其他领导人的著作收入较少，从而引起了人们的误解。但这毕竟是新中国成立后的事情，1941年编辑文献时毛泽东“对选用党的领导人特别是他本人的著作时是很慎重，很严格的”，当时收入的毛泽东文章，“大多是他为中央（或苏区党组织）起草的决议、指示等文件和在党的会议上所作的报告与结论（这与他当时在党和军队中的特殊地位有关）”，“他个人的署名文章很少收入……如《实践论》、《矛盾论》、《论持久战》、《新民主主义论》等等”，“但是他并没有把这些文章编入《六大以来》”。

Gao’s book claims that in the process of editing *From the Sixth Congress Onward*, Mao Zedong “carefully tailored some of his articles published in the early and mid-1930s,” and that “Mao selected only a small part of his report ‘Only Soviet Power Can Save China’ from the Second National Soviet Congress in January 1934, renaming it *Our Economic Policy* and *Be Concerned with the Well-Being of the Masses, Pay Attention to Methods of Work*.” In fact, these two articles were additions made during the 1952 reprint; the original 1941 edition did not include them.

高著认为，毛泽东在编辑《六大以来》过程中，“对自己在三十年代前、中期发表的一些文章还做了细心的剪裁”，“毛只选录了他在1934年1月全国第二次苏维埃大会上的报告《只有苏维埃才能救中国》的一小部分，易名为《我们的经济政策》和《关心群众生活，注意工作方法》”。其实，这两篇文章为1952年再版时新增内容，1941年原版并没有收录这两篇文章。

*Our Economic Policy* was originally part of Mao Zedong’s report delivered at the Second National Congress of Workers’ and Peasants’ Representatives, held in Ruijin, Jiangxi, from January 22 to February 1, 1934. *Be Concerned with the Well-Being of the Masses, Pay Attention to Methods of Work* was part of Mao Zedong’s “Conclusion on the Report of the Central Executive Committee” at the same congress. After the founding of the People’s Republic, while editing Volume 1 of the *Selected Works of Mao Zedong*, Mao Zedong merged and reorganized two sections — the fourth part of the report, “Further Remarks on the Soviet Economic Policy,” and two paragraphs from the section “Further Remarks on the Soviet Fiscal Policy” — drafting the title *Our Economic Policy*. At the same time, he slightly revised the main part of the “Conclusion on the Report of the Central Executive Committee,” drafting the title *Be Concerned with the Well-Being of the Masses, Pay Attention to Methods of Work*. Both articles were included in the first edition of Volume 1 of the *Selected Works of Mao Zedong*, published in October 1951. When *From the Sixth Congress Onward* was reprinted in April 1952, the titles of both articles were included in its table of contents.

《我们的经济政策》原为毛泽东在1934年1月22日至2月1日在江西瑞金召开的第二次全国工农兵代表大会上的报告的一部分，《关心群众生活，注意工作方法》为毛泽东在该次会议所作《关于中央执行委员会报告的结论》中的一部分。新中国成立后，在编辑《毛泽东选集》第1卷时，毛泽东将该报告第四部分《再说苏维埃的经济政策》一节和《再说苏维埃的财政政策》一节中的两段，进行了合并整理，拟题为《我们的经济政策》，同时将《关于中央执行委员会报告的结论》的主要部分略做修改，拟题为《关心群众生活，注意工作方法》，两文收入1951年10月出版的《毛泽东选集》第1卷第1版。1952年4月《六大以来》再版时，收入两文目录。

II. On the “Claim of Heavy Revision”: Whether Mao Zedong Intercepted and Renamed the Article *On the New Stage*

二、关于“大动手术说”：毛泽东是否对《论新阶段》一文截取、改名问题

Gao’s book mentions that Mao Zedong “heavily revised *On the New Stage*, intercepting only a few sections of the report discussing ‘adapting Marxism to the Chinese context’ and ‘independence and initiative,’ and renaming it *The Role of the Chinese Communist Party in the National War*.” This claim contradicts the facts.

高著提到毛泽东“对《论新阶段》更是大动手术，他只截取报告中谈‘马克思主义中国化’和‘独立自主’的若干节，改名为《中国共产党在民族战争中的地位》”一事，有违事实真相。

First, the document “The Role of the Chinese Communist Party in the National War” included in *Since the Sixth National Congress* was originally a subheading within the article “On the New Stage”; there is no issue of renaming. “On the New Stage” was originally a report delivered by Mao Zedong from October 12 to 14, 1938, at the Enlarged Sixth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC. After Mao personally revised and proofread the report, it was published in full in Issue 57 of the Party Central Committee’s organ *Liberation* on November 25 of the same year. According to the original records of *Liberation*, the article consisted of eight parts: “From the Fifth Plenary Session to the Sixth Plenary Session,” “Summary of the Fifteen Months of the War of Resistance,” “The Stage of Development of the National War of Resistance and the National United Front,” “The Nation’s Urgent Tasks at Present,” “Protracted War and Protracted Cooperation,” “China’s Anti-Aggression War and the World’s Anti-Fascist Movement,” “The Role of the Chinese Communist Party in the National War,” and “Convening the Party’s Seventh National Congress.” “The Role of the Chinese Communist Party in the National War” was the original title of the seventh part; the claim of “renaming” is clearly untenable.

第一，收入《六大以来》的文献《中国共产党在民族战争中的地位》的标题原本就是《论新阶段》一文中的次级标题，不存在改名问题。《论新阶段》原为毛泽东1938年10月12日至14日在中共扩大的六届六中全会的报告。该报告经毛泽东本人修改校对后，同年11月25日由中共中央机关刊物《解放》第57期全文刊载。根据《解放》原刊记载，该文由“五中全会到六中全会”“抗战十五个月的总结”“抗日民族战争与抗日民族统一战线发展的阶段”“全民族的当前紧急任务”“长期战争与长期合作”“中国的反侵略战争与世界的反法西斯运动”“中国共产党在民族战争中的地位”“召集党的七次代表大会”等八个部分组成。“中国共产党在民族战争中的地位”为第七部分原标题，“改名”一说显然站不住脚。

Second, “adapting Marxism to the Chinese context” and “independence and autonomy” were already content included in the seventh part of “On the New Stage”; the claim of a “major surgical operation” is untenable. According to the original records of Issue 57 of *Liberation*, the seventh part of “On the New Stage” was divided into 14 subsections: (1) The Nature of the Problem; (2) Patriotism and Internationalism; (3) The Exemplary Role of Communist Party Members in the National War; (4) Uniting the Whole Nation and Opposing Spies in the National Front; (5) Expanding the Communist Party and Preventing Infiltration by Spies; (6) Upholding the United Front and Upholding the Party’s Independence; (7) Taking the Whole Situation into Account, Taking the Majority into Account, and Working Together with Allies; (8) Cadre Policy; (9) Party Discipline; (10) Party Democracy; (11) Our Party Has Been Consolidated and Strengthened through Struggle on Two Fronts; (12) The Current Struggle on Two Fronts; (13) Study; (14) Uniting the Whole Party to Unite the Whole Nation. In subsections 6 and 13, Mao discussed the issues of the Party’s independence and autonomy within the united front and adapting Marxism to the Chinese context, respectively. When *Since the Sixth National Congress* was reprinted in 1952 and 1980, “for Mao Zedong’s works and documents drafted by him that had already been included in the *Selected Works of Mao Zedong*, the main text was no longer compiled, and only the titles were listed in the table of contents.” Gao’s [8]8 Gao refers to Gao Hua (1954–2011), a Chinese historian whose work *How Did the Red Sun Rise?* (2000) critically examined the Yan’an Rectification Movement and Mao’s role in Party history, including claims about the editing of *Since the Sixth National Congress*. related inferences and conclusions are mainly based on the 1980 edition, which contains only the titles of Mao’s works without the main text. How the author arrived at the claim that Mao performed a “major surgical operation” is unknown.

第二，“马克思主义的中国化”和“独立自主”本就是《论新阶段》第七部分包含的内容，“大动手术”一说站不住脚。根据《解放》第57期原刊记载，《论新阶段》第七部分共分14个小节：（1）问题的性质；（2）爱国主义与国际主义；（3）共产党员在民族战争中的模范作用；（4）团结全民族与反对民族阵线中的奸细；（5）扩大共产党与防止奸细混入；（6）坚持统一战线与坚持党的独立性；（7）照顾全局，照顾多数，及和同盟者一道来干；（8）干部政策；（9）党的纪律；（10）党的民主；（11）我们党已经从两条战线斗争中巩固与壮大起来；（12）当前的两条战线斗争；（13）学习；（14）团结全党到团结全民族。毛泽东在第6、13小节中分别谈及了党在统一战线中的独立自主和马克思主义中国化问题。1952、1980年《六大以来》再版时对“毛泽东同志的著作和他所起草的文件，凡已收入《毛泽东选集》的，正文不再编入，只将题名列入目录”。高著的相关推断和结论主要依据的是1980年版，而该版本有关毛泽东的著作只有题目没有正文，作者缘何得出毛泽东“大动手术”一说，不得而知。

So, is it possible that Mao Zedong made major revisions to the article “The Role of the Chinese Communist Party in the National War” when editing *Since the Sixth National Congress*? The answer is that both the possibility and the necessity are extremely low.

那么，是否存在这样一种情况：毛泽东在编辑《六大以来》时对《中国共产党在民族战争中的地位》一文进行了重大修改？答案是，可能性和必要性都极低。

In terms of possibility, *Since the Sixth National Congress* was an important Party document during the Yan’an Rectification Movement [9]9 The Yan’an Rectification Movement (1942–1944) was a Party-wide ideological campaign to establish Mao Zedong Thought as the guiding ideology and to eliminate dissent, involving the study of designated documents and criticism of targeted individuals. and was also the main documentary source for the “Resolution on Certain Historical Questions” [10]10 The “Resolution on Certain Historical Questions” was adopted at the Sixth Plenary Session of the Seventh Central Committee in April 1945, providing an official Party history that affirmed Mao’s leadership and condemned earlier “erroneous lines.” adopted at the Sixth Plenary Session of the Seventh Central Committee of the CPC in 1945. It was highly authoritative. If Mao had made major revisions to the article at that time, other Party publications thereafter would inevitably have consciously aligned with it. However, whether it was *Chairman Mao’s Three Major Works* compiled and printed by the CPC Jin-Sui Sub-bureau in October 1943, *Collection of Important Documents Since the War of Resistance* reprinted by Guangming Bookstore in 1946, or the *Selected Works of Mao Zedong* printed by Dalian Mass Bookstore in 1947 and Northeast Bookstore in 1948, the article’s structure and wording remained consistent with the original text of the seventh part in Issue 57 of *Liberation*. It was not until the publication of Volume 2 of the *Selected Works of Mao Zedong* in March 1952 that the title of the first subsection, “The Nature of the Problem,” was removed, and some adjustments were made to the titles and content of other subsections.

从可能性来说，《六大以来》是延安整风时期党的重要文献，也是1945年中共六届七中全会通过的《关于若干历史问题的决议》的主要文献来源，极具权威性，如果毛泽东当时对该文进行了重大修改，之后党的其他出版物必然自觉与之看齐。然而，无论是1943年10月中共晋绥分局编印的《毛主席三大名著》，还是1946年光明书店翻印的《抗战以来重要文件汇集》，又或是1947年大连大众书店、1948年东北书店印行的《毛泽东选集》，该文都在篇章结构和文字上同《解放》第57期原文第七部分保持一致。直到1952年3月《毛泽东选集》第2卷出版时，才去掉了该文第一小节标题——“问题的性质”，并对其他小节的标题及内容作了一些调整。

In terms of necessity, “The Role of the Chinese Communist Party in the National War” was originally the seventh part of “On the New Stage.” Before the editing of *Since the Sixth National Congress*, “On the New Stage” had already been widely disseminated. By March 1939, 120,000 copies of the article had been printed in Shanghai, making it not difficult to obtain the original version. In addition to *Liberation*, which was widely distributed in the CPC base areas, the full text of the report was also published in the combined Issues 3 and 4 of *Documents* by the Documentary Series Publishing House, and a separate edition was published by Northeast Bookstore in May 1947. In 1940, Lin Boqu and Gao Zili, leaders of the Shaanxi-Gansu-Ningxia Border Region, wrote to commissioners and county magistrates regarding study, stipulating that works including “On the New Stage” “must be read multiple times by every cadre.” The article was not only widely circulated but also widely read. According to Yang Kanghua’s recollection, after Mao delivered the report “On the New Stage,” “the Hong Kong Eighth Route Army Office immediately reprinted it,” and “the Southeast Special Committee [11]11 The Southeast Special Committee was a regional Party organization in Guangdong, responsible for Party work in the southeast during the War of Resistance. earnestly organized study and discussion.” Wei Zhangping also stated: “Comrade Mao Zedong’s *On Protracted War* and *On the New Stage* were the books we loved to read most; almost everyone had a copy.”

从必要性来说，《中国共产党在民族战争中的地位》原为《论新阶段》的第七部分，在编辑《六大以来》之前，《论新阶段》已经广为传播，截至1939年3月该文在上海印了12万份，获取原版难度不大。除在中共根据地广泛发行的《解放》外，该报告全文还刊载于文献丛刊出版社出版的《文献》第3、4期合订本，1947年5月东北书店出版了单行本。1940年陕甘宁边区领导林伯渠、高自立曾就学习问题给专员县长们写信，规定包括《论新阶段》在内的著作“每个干部必须多看”。该文不仅流传广，读者也多。据杨康华回忆，毛泽东作《论新阶段》报告后，“香港八路军办事处马上翻印”，“东南特委抓紧学习讨论”。韦章平也谈道：“毛泽东同志的《论持久战》和《论新阶段》算是我们最爱读的书了，几乎人手一册。”

“On the New Stage” was also widely circulated and read in the Kuomintang-controlled areas. In December 1938, the Xinhua Daily Press specially published a separate edition of “On the New Stage” and published a subscription notice: “*On the New Stage* is Comrade Mao Zedong’s report at the Enlarged Sixth Plenary Session of the CPC. The resolutions of the Sixth Plenary Session were adopted based on this report, demonstrating the great value of *On the New Stage*. Those who have read the resolutions and declarations of the Sixth Plenary Session should certainly have a copy in hand; those who have not read the resolutions and declarations of the Sixth Plenary Session but are enthusiastically engaged in national salvation work must read it even more.” Kuomintang literati such as Zhang Xuanzhong and Ye Qing [12]12 Zhang Xuanzhong and Ye Qing were Kuomintang-aligned intellectuals who engaged in ideological debates with the CPC during the War of Resistance, often criticizing communist theory. specifically “introduced” and “evaluated” the article: “Among the pamphlets of the Communists produced in the past two years, there are very many. However, those with important content, relatively systematic, and with relatively insightful views should be led by Mao Zedong’s *On the New Stage*.”

《论新阶段》在国统区同样流传广、读者多。1938年12月，新华日报馆特地出版《论新阶段》单行本并刊登征订启事：“《论新阶段》是毛泽东同志在中共扩大的六中全会的报告，中共六中全会的决议就是根据这一报告通过的，可见《论新阶段》的伟大价值。读过中共六中全会决议和宣言的人，固应人手一本，未读过中共六中全会的决议和宣言而热心从事救亡工作的同胞，更不可不读。”国民党文人张绚中、叶青等人曾专门对该文进行“介绍”和“评价”：“共产党人底小册子，在这两年中，非常之多。然而内容重要，较有系统，又较有见解的，当推毛泽东底《论新阶段》。”

Thus, before and after the publication of *Since the Sixth National Congress*, the article “On the New Stage” had already been widely disseminated within China. If Mao had performed a “major surgical operation” on the article by means of substitution, cutting, and splicing, it would inevitably have aroused doubts within the Party. In fact, from the official publication of “On the New Stage” in November 1938 to the publication of Volume 2 of the *Selected Works of Mao Zedong* in March 1952, neither “On the New Stage” nor “The Role of the Chinese Communist Party in the National War,” which was formed by separating its seventh part into an independent article, underwent any changes in structure or argumentative conclusions.

可见，在《六大以来》出版前后，《论新阶段》一文已在国内广泛传播。如果毛泽东用移花接木、剪裁拼接的方式对该文“大动手术”，必然会引起党内质疑。实际上，从《论新阶段》1938年11月正式发表，到1952年3月《毛泽东选集》第2卷出版，无论是《论新阶段》还是由其第七部分单独成文的《中国共产党在民族战争中的地位》，没有发生篇章结构或论点论断的变动。

Third, Mao Zedong’s decision to separate the seventh part of “On the New Stage” into an independent article and compile it into *Since the Sixth National Congress* was related to the objective circumstances inside and outside the Party at the time. The omission of other parts was to avoid content repetition. Gao’s claim of “deleting as much as possible to protect one’s own image” is untenable. As a collection of important Party documents, *Since the Sixth National Congress* did not include every document or every full text. As mentioned above, several of Mao Zedong’s famous works were not included in *Since the Sixth National Congress* according to his personal wishes. For articles by other CPC leaders, Mao also made selections based on their importance. According to Hu Qiaomu’s recollection, Mao’s editing of *Since the Sixth National Congress* “had a boundary”: “I remember there was an article that was Liu Shaoqi’s self-criticism (the White areas’ Party accused Liu of rightism, and Liu was forced to make a self-examination). I asked Chairman Mao whether to use this article, and he said no. This shows that editing *Since the Sixth National Congress* did not mean including every document; otherwise, the volume would have been even larger.” At the same time, not every one of Mao’s works included in the book was included in full. For example, the article “Why Is It That Red Political Power Can Exist in China?” [13]13 “Why Is It That Red Political Power Can Exist in China?” is a 1928 article by Mao Zedong that analyzed the conditions for the survival of communist base areas, later included in the *Selected Works of Mao Zedong*. included in the 1941 edition of *Since the Sixth National Congress* was originally part of a resolution Mao wrote for the Second Congress of the Party on the Hunan-Jiangxi Border Region, held on October 4, 1928.

第三，毛泽东将《论新阶段》第七部分单独成文编入《六大以来》，同当时党内外客观形势有关，其他部分舍掉是为了避免内容重复，高著“有碍自身形象而尽情删除”一说并不成立。《六大以来》作为党的重要文献汇集，并非有文必录、全文必入。上文提及，毛泽东的多篇名作遵从其个人意愿，没有编入《六大以来》。对中共其他领导人的文章，毛泽东也会根据其重要性作出取舍。据胡乔木回忆，毛泽东编辑《六大以来》“是有一个界限的”：“我记得有一篇文章是刘少奇的自我批评（白区的党指责刘右倾，刘被迫作检讨）。我问毛主席，这篇文章用不用，他说不用。可见编辑《六大以来》也并不是有文必录，不然篇幅更大。”同时，编入该书的毛泽东著作也不是每篇都全文必入，比如1941年版《六大以来》收入的《中国的红色政权为什么能够存在？》一文，原为毛泽东为1928年10月4日召开的湘赣边界党的第二次代表大会写的决议的一部分。

The 1941 edition of *Documents from the Sixth Plenum Onward* includes two texts of Mao Zedong’s reports to the Sixth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC: “The Role of the Chinese Communist Party in the National War” and “The Question of War and Strategy.” Following “The Question of War and Strategy” is the “Political Resolution of the Enlarged Sixth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee.” According to the *Chronicle of Mao Zedong*, on November 6, “the Enlarged Sixth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee, based on Mao Zedong’s report ‘The New Stage of the Anti-Japanese National War and the Anti-Japanese National United Front,’ adopted the political resolution ‘The New Stage of the Anti-Japanese National Self-Defense War and the Anti-Japanese National United Front.’” In other words, the main viewpoints of this resolution derived from Mao’s political report “On the New Stage.” The resolution consists of five parts: “A Basic Summary of the Chinese Nation’s Sixteen Months of the War of Resistance,” “Characteristics of the Current Situation in the War of Resistance,” “The Current Urgent Tasks of the Entire Chinese Nation,” “Long-Term Cooperation between the Kuomintang and the Communist Party to Ensure Victory in the Great Cause of the War of Resistance and National Reconstruction, and to Strive for a New Republic of China Based on the Three People’s Principles,” and “The Chinese Communist Party in the National Self-Defense War.” Its structure and main content are essentially consistent with the aforementioned “On the New Stage.”

1941年版《六大以来》收录毛泽东在中共六届六中全会所作报告的文献共两篇：《中国共产党在民族战争中的地位》和《战争和战略问题》，《战争和战略问题》的后面是《中共扩大的六中全会政治决议案》。据《毛泽东年谱》记载，11月6日“中共扩大的六届六中全会，根据毛泽东所作的《抗日民族战争与抗日民族统一战线发展的新阶段》报告，通过了《抗日民族自卫战争与抗日民族统一战线发展的新阶段》政治决议案”。换句话说，该决议案的主要观点由毛泽东的政治报告《论新阶段》而来。决议案包括“中华民族十六个月抗战的基本总结”“目前抗战形势的特点”“全中华民族的当前紧急任务”“国共长期合作，保证抗战建国大业的胜利，为三民主义的新中华民国而奋斗”“民族自卫战争中的中国共产党”五部分内容，与前述《论新阶段》的篇章结构和主旨内容基本一致。

In summary, two inferences can be drawn. On the one hand, because there was some overlap in content between the text “On the New Stage” and the “Political Resolution of the Enlarged Sixth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee,” Mao Zedong did not include the full text of “On the New Stage” when editing. On the other hand, the inclusion of the seventh part of “On the New Stage” as a separate text in *Documents from the Sixth Plenum Onward* was also related to the objective domestic and Party circumstances during the editing process. After the War of Resistance entered the stalemate stage, the Kuomintang’s anti-communist activities became rampant. In early 1941, it engineered the “Southern Anhui Incident.” [14]14 The Southern Anhui Incident (January 1941) was a major clash during the Chinese Civil War in which Kuomintang forces attacked the Communist New Fourth Army, nearly annihilating its headquarters and capturing its commander, Ye Ting. This incident once again highlighted the difficulty of balancing the need to uphold the united front in the face of foreign invasion with the need to maintain the Party’s independence in the face of Kuomintang-Communist struggle. Both the “Left” and Right lines failed to handle this balance properly and brought great losses to the Communist Party. From the perspective of ideological method, whether “Left” or Right, both stemmed from an inability to scientifically integrate Marxism with China’s actual conditions. This is also the deep-seated reason why the Yan’an Rectification Movement began with the question of study and started from the ideological method. Therefore, including “The Role of the Chinese Communist Party in the National War” as a separate text in *Documents from the Sixth Plenum Onward* could both highlight the focus of the Communist Party’s work at the time and form a mutually enriching and complementary relationship with the political resolution of the Sixth Plenary Session.

综上所述，可以作出两方面推断：一方面，由于《论新阶段》一文和《中共扩大的六中全会政治决议案》存在一定的内容重复，所以毛泽东编辑时没有收入《论新阶段》的全文。另一方面，《论新阶段》第七部分单独成文编入《六大以来》，还同编辑过程中的党内外客观形势有关。抗日战争进入相持阶段后，国民党的反共活动甚嚣尘上，1941年初制造了“皖南事变”，该事件再次凸显了如何平衡好面对外敌入侵必须坚持统一战线和面对国共斗争必须坚持党的独立性的难题，“左”和右两条路线都是没有处理好这种平衡的表现，也都给共产党带来了极大损失。从思想方法上说，无论“左”还是右，都源于不能科学地把马克思主义和中国实际相结合，这也是延安整风为什么首先从学习问题开始、从思想方法着手的深层动因。因此，《中国共产党在民族战争中的地位》单独成文收入《六大以来》，既可以凸显当时共产党的工作重心，也可以和六届六中全会的政治决议案形成互为丰富补充的关系。

III. On the “Concealing the Truth” Claim: The Problem of Incorrect Dates for Some Documents in *Documents from the Sixth Plenum Onward*

三、关于“掩盖真相说”：《六大以来》部分文献日期错误问题

Gao’s book [15]15 Gao refers to a specific work, likely Gao Hua’s *How Did the Red Sun Rise?*, which critically examines Mao Zedong’s rise and the Yan’an Rectification Movement. argues that during the editing of *Documents from the Sixth Plenum Onward*, Mao Zedong “tampered with” the date of the “Political Resolution of the First Party Congress of the Central Soviet Area,” changing its date of formation from November 1931 to March of the same year, thereby “concealing the historical truth that from April to October 1931, the Central Delegation led by Ren Bishi supported Mao Zedong and jointly opposed Xiang Ying with Mao… By including this resolution in *Documents from the Sixth Plenum Onward*, Mao also gave Ren Bishi a warning, making him understand that he too had been associated with the erroneous line in history.”

高著认为，毛泽东在编辑《六大以来》过程中，对《中央苏区第一次党代表大会政治决议案》的日期“作了手脚”，将其形成日期由1931年11月改成了同年3月，“掩盖了1931年4月至10月，由任弼时为首的中央代表团支持毛泽东、与毛联手共同反对项英的历史真相……毛将这个决议案收入《六大以来》，也是给任弼时一个警戒，使其明白，他在历史上也和错误路线沾过边”。

Upon verification, this resolution was drafted by Wang Jiaxiang, and its date of formation was indeed November 1–5, 1931. However, to answer the question of incorrect dates in *Documents from the Sixth Plenum Onward*, it is also necessary to take a holistic view, examining whether this is an isolated problem or a widespread one, and why the date errors occurred.

经查证，该决议由王稼祥起草，形成日期确为1931年11月1日至5日。但是，回答《六大以来》中文献日期错误的问题，同样需要立足整体，考察其是个别问题还是普遍问题及为什么会出现日期错误。

First, the problem of incorrect date markings for documents in *Documents from the Sixth Plenum Onward* is a widespread issue. Upon cross-checking, the book contains a total of 20 date errors, listed as follows: [16]16 The original text includes a table listing 20 documents with date errors, which is omitted here for brevity.

第一，《六大以来》出现文件日期标注错误是一个普遍性问题。经核对，该书共有20处日期错误，列表如下：

Second, the main reason for the date errors was the difficulty in locating original documents. Among the 20 documents with incorrect dates, most were resolutions, directives, letters, and other documents passed by the Party Central Committee during the period of the Jiangxi Soviet Area. Because the documents collected in the book span a period of 13 years, during which the central organs underwent several long-distance transfers, especially the move from the Central Soviet Area to northern Shaanxi in 1934, many documents were destroyed or lost. Additionally, during this period, Party institutions were adjusted multiple times; when some organs were abolished or merged, “the archives of the original organs were often scattered or taken to another organ. After several changes, the archival materials of the original organs could no longer be found.” Therefore, the collection of documents for *Documents from the Sixth Plenum Onward* was “a time-consuming and arduous task, taking more than a year in total.”

第二，出现日期错误主要原因在于原始文件难以查找。20份日期有误的文献中，大多为江西苏区时期党中央通过的决议、指令、信件等文件。由于该书收集的文献时段跨度达13年，其间中央机关几经长途转移，特别是1934年从中央苏区到陕北，许多文件销毁或散失。此外这一时期党的机构多次调整，部分机关撤销或合并时，“常常有把原机关的档案分散或带到另一个机关的现象，经过几次变动，原机关的档案材料就找不到下落了”。因此，《六大以来》的文献收集就是一项“既费时又艰苦的工作，前后用了一年多的时间”。

The methods for collecting materials at that time included the following. First, materials brought by the Central Committee from the Soviet Area to Yan’an, which accounted for a very small proportion. Second, documents preserved by Mao Zedong himself, mainly his own manuscripts, which were very limited in quantity. Third, searching Party newspapers and periodicals. Since Party newspapers and periodicals were mainly in the Jiangnan and Shanghai areas, it was not easy to find them in Yan’an. Moreover, Party resolutions, orders, directives, and notices were rarely published in newspapers and periodicals at that time, so this source was also limited. Fourth, searching Kuomintang newspapers and books. For anti-communist purposes, the Kuomintang had compiled a set of *Compilation of Red Bandit Reactionary Documents* in the 1930s, which collected a large number of Communist Party documents and materials. However, documents found through this channel had to be checked for tampering, a task personally reviewed by Mao Zedong. For example, the record for the Luochuan Conference showed the dates as August 22–24, 1937, but in fact, the meeting was still in session on the morning of the 25th. When editing, Mao Zedong corrected the date to the 25th based on the time of adoption.

当时收集资料的途径包括以下几条。一是中央从苏区带到延安的，占比很小。二是毛泽东自己保存的，主要是其本人的文稿，数量十分有限。三是从党的报刊中查找，因为当时党的报刊主要在江南、上海一带，在延安查找这些报刊不易，且当时党的决议、命令、指示、通告等在报刊上登载的很少，这部分资料也有限。四是从国民党的报刊书籍中查找。国民党出于反共需要在20世纪30年代编辑了一套《赤匪反动文件汇编》，收集了共产党大量的文件资料。但从这个途径找到的文献，要看有没有被篡改，这个工作由毛泽东亲自审核。比如洛川会议的时间，记录上是1937年8月22日至24日，实际上25日上午还在开会，毛泽东在编辑时以通过的时间为准将其更正为25日。

During the editing of *Documents from the Sixth Plenum Onward*, collecting documents was difficult, and verifying the text and dates was also highly challenging, especially for documents from earlier periods. For example, the “Outline of the Central Propaganda Department on Chinese Fascism” was published in full in *Struggle* (Shanghai), Issue 53 (September 5, 1933), *Red Flag Weekly*, Issue 60 (September 30, 1933), and *Struggle* (Soviet Area), Issue 30 (October 14, 1933). Among these, *Struggle* (Soviet Area) only had the signature “Central Propaganda Department” without a specific date, while the other two publications both bore the date “September 1, 1933.” Other discrepancies involved differences between the date of adoption and the date of publication, or issues where documents were published multiple times and the earlier version could not be found later.

在编辑《六大以来》过程中，文献收集难，核对文字和日期的难度也大，特别是那些形成年代较早的文献。比如《中央宣传部关于中国法西斯蒂的提纲》，曾在《斗争》（上海）第53期（1933年9月5日）、《红旗周报》第60期（1933年9月30日）、《斗争》（苏区）第30期（1933年10月14日）全文登载，其中《斗争》（苏区）只有“中央宣传部”落款，没有标注具体日期，而其他两刊均标有日期“一九三三年九月一日”。其他还有属于通过日期和发表日期的误差，有的是多次发表、后来没有找到早期文献的问题。

Third, existing historical materials prove that there is no cognitive premise for Mao Zedong deliberately altering the date of formation of the “Political Resolution of the First Party Congress of the Central Soviet Area” to “warn” Ren Bishi. The “Political Resolution of the First Party Congress of the Central Soviet Area” is the document with the largest date discrepancy in the entire book *Documents from the Sixth Plenum Onward*. The First Congress of the Central Soviet Area, held from November 1 to 5, 1931, adopted a total of five resolutions: the Political Resolution, Party Building, the Red Army Question, Soviet Area Trade Unions, and Youth League Work. *Documents from the Sixth Plenum Onward* only included the Political Resolution. Logically, such a large date error should not have occurred for this document. First, the First Congress of the Central Soviet Area and the First National Congress of the Chinese Soviet Republic (November 7–20, 1931) were held consecutively. Documents included in *Documents from the Sixth Plenum Onward*, such as the “Proclamation of the Provisional Central Government of the Chinese Soviet Republic to the Outside World” and the “Constitutional Outline of the Chinese Soviet Republic,” have correct date markings (both November 7, 1931). Second, because Mao Zedong, Ren Bishi, and Wang Jiaxiang all participated in the First Congress of the Central Soviet Area and had all seen the relevant documents before the official publication of *Documents from the Sixth Plenum Onward*, cross-referencing memories among multiple people should have allowed for determining the approximate time. Given this, why was the date error for this document as large as eight months? The reason is unknown. But does this, as Gao’s book claims, prove that the document “was changed to March 1931,” “precisely proving from the opposite side that Mao had a profound line divergence with the Central Committee after the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee,” demonstrating that Mao “had long been wrongly suppressed by the Central Committee,” and simultaneously giving Ren Bishi “a warning”? This claim is far-fetched. Historical materials prove that around the time of the official publication of *Documents from the Sixth Plenum Onward* in December 1941, Mao Zedong had not yet regarded the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee as the mark of the beginning of the third “Left” line’s implementation in the Central Committee. [17]17 The Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee (January 1931) is often identified by Party historiography as the point when Wang Ming’s “Left” line gained dominance in the CPC Central Committee.

第三，现有史料证明毛泽东不存在故意修改《中央苏区第一次党代表大会政治决议案》形成日期以“警戒”任弼时的认知前提。《中央苏区第一次党代表大会政治决议案》是《六大以来》整书中日期误差最大的一份文献。1931年11月1日至5日召开中央苏区第一次代表大会共通过《政治决议案》、党的建设、红军问题、苏区工会和青年团工作等5份决议案，《六大以来》只收入了《政治决议案》。按理，该文献日期不该出现如此大的误差。一是中央苏区第一次代表大会和中华苏维埃第一次全国代表大会（1931年11月7日至20日）先后召开，收入《六大以来》的《中华苏维埃共和国临时政府对外宣言》《中华苏维埃共和国宪法大纲》等文件日期标注无误（均为1931年11月7日）。二是因为毛泽东、任弼时、王稼祥都参加了中央苏区第一次代表大会，《六大以来》正式出版前也都看过相关文献，多人交叉回忆应该能确定大致时间。既然如此，缘何该文献日期误差达八个月之多？其中原因无法知晓，但这是否如高著所说，该文献“被改为1931年3月”，“正好从反面说明毛与六届四中全会后的中央存在深刻的路线分歧”，证明毛泽东“长期遭受中央的错误压制”，同时给任弼时“一个警戒”呢？这一说法过于牵强。史料证明，1941年12月《六大以来》正式出版前后，毛泽东还没有将六届四中全会看作是第三次“左”倾路线开始在中央贯彻的标志。

The Committee for Settling Past History, organized on October 13, 1941, drafted under Mao Zedong’s chairmanship the “Draft Conclusion on the Question of the Central Leadership Line Since the Fourth Plenary Session” (hereinafter referred to as the “Historical Draft”). In it, the judgment was made: although the Fourth Plenary Session had shortcomings and errors, it was “basically correct, because it opposed Li Lisan’s erroneous line and Luo Zhanglong’s anti-Party behavior”; the Central Committee resolution of May 9, 1931 — *The Current Political Situation and the Party’s Urgent Tasks* — was the “sprout or embryo” of the third “Left” line; the Central Committee resolution of September 20, 1931 — *The Party’s Urgent Tasks Arising from the Red Army and Workers’ and Peasants’ Breakthrough of the Third ‘Encirclement and Suppression’ and the Gradual Maturation of the Revolutionary Crisis* — was the “starting point or birth” of the third “Left” line. These views reflected the opinion of the September 1941 Politburo meeting of the CPC Central Committee on the third “Left” line. At that time, Mao Zedong regarded the “September 18th Incident” [18]18 The September 18th Incident (1931) was a staged event by the Japanese Kwantung Army that led to the Japanese occupation of Northeast China. as relatively prominent, because after September 18th the domestic and international situation underwent a fundamental change. Therefore, the “Historical Draft” “focused its analysis on the line errors from the September 18th Incident to the Zunyi Conference period,” [19]19 The Zunyi Conference (January 1935) was a pivotal meeting of the CPC Politburo during the Long March that established Mao Zedong’s leadership role in the Party and military. with its content occupying 10 of the 16 issues in the entire draft, becoming the main part of the “Historical Draft.” As late as February 1942, Mao Zedong’s understanding had still not changed. In a telegram to Zhou Enlai on February 21, he pointed out: “The Politburo made a detailed review of past line issues last October, and unanimously agreed that the Central line from the Fourth Plenary Session to the September 18th Incident was basically correct, but had several serious principled errors. The Central line from the September 18th Incident to the Zunyi Conference (a total of three years and four months) was erroneous. The Central line after the Zunyi Conference was correct.” Even so, Mao Zedong did not advocate viewing the issue in absolute terms. On March 5, 1944, when chairing a Politburo meeting of the CPC Central Committee, he still stressed: “Do not oppose everything. In the period from the Fourth Plenary Session to the Zunyi Conference, do not deny everything either. At that time, I worked together with Bo Gu; we had common ground — both wanted to fight Chiang Kai-shek. The point of divergence was how to fight Chiang Kai-shek, that is, a divergence in tactics… If we deny everything in the past, that is a deviation. We must analyze; we must not make sweeping blanket denials.”

1941年10月13日组织的清算过去历史委员会，在毛泽东主持下起草的《关于四中全会以来中央领导路线问题结论草案》（以下简称“历史草案”）中作出判断：四中全会虽有缺点和错误，但是“基本上是正确的，因为它反对了李立三的错误路线与罗章龙的反党行为”；1931年5月9日中共中央决议案——《目前的政治形势及党的紧急任务》，是第三次“左”倾路线的“萌芽或胚胎”；1931年9月20日中共中央决议案——《由于工农红军冲破第三次“围剿”及革命危机逐渐成熟而产生的党的紧急任务》，是第三次“左”倾路线的“起点或出胎”。这些观点，反映了1941年9月中共中央政治局会议关于第三次“左”倾路线的看法。当时，毛泽东把“九一八”看得比较突出，因为“九一八”后国内外形势发生根本的变化，所以“历史草案”将“重点放在分析‘九一八’事变至遵义会议时期的路线错误”，其内容在整个草案的16个问题中占了10个，成为“历史草案”的主体部分。直到1942年2月，毛泽东的认识仍没有发生变化。他在2月21日给周恩来的电报中指出：“政治局在去年十月间曾详尽检讨了过去路线问题，一致认为四中全会至‘九一八’中央路线基本上是正确的，但有好几个严重原则错误。‘九一八’至遵义会议（共三年又四个月）中央路线是错误的。遵义会议以后中央路线是正确的。”即便如此，毛泽东也不主张绝对化看待问题。1944年3月5日，毛泽东在主持中共中央政治局会议时仍然强调：“不要反对一切。四中全会到遵义会议这一段历史，也不要一切否认。当时我与博古在一起工作，有共同点，都要打蒋介石，分歧点就是如何打蒋介石，就是策略上的分歧……如果把过去一切都否认就是一种偏向，我们要分析，不要笼统地一概否定。”

In summary, the claims about Mao Zedong’s compilation of *Since the Sixth National Congress* — “the theory of highlighting the individual,” “the theory of major surgery,” and “the theory of covering up the truth” — are all inconsistent with historical facts. Furthermore, whether Mao Zedong doctored historical documents is both a serious academic issue, concerning the truth of the facts and the rights and wrongs, and a major political issue, concerning the historical evaluation and social image of an important figure. Only by fully possessing data and using scientific methods to analyze it can we approach true history. Framing Party history solely within the “power struggle theory” easily leads to biased conclusions and violates the principles of objectivity and comprehensiveness in historical research.

综上所述，关于毛泽东编辑《六大以来》的“突出个人说”“大动手术说”“掩盖真相说”，都是不符合史实的。进而言之，毛泽东有无篡改历史文献，既是一个严肃的学术问题，关乎史实真相和是非曲直，又是一个重大的政治问题，关乎重要人物的历史评价和社会形象。必须在充分占有资料的基础上，运用科学的方法予以分析，才能接近真实的历史。仅以“权力斗争论”为框架阐述党史，容易得出偏颇的结论，有违历史研究的客观性和全面性原则。

(Author: Wang Xuechao, Associate Professor, School of Marxism, Tianjin Normal University)

（作者：王雪超，天津师范大学马克思主义学院副教授）

(Project: This article is a phased result of the 2021 National Social Science Fund project “Compilation of Historical Materials and Research on Major Historical Facts of the Yan’an Rectification Movement” [21STA029])

（项目：本文系2021年国家社会科学基金项目“延安整风运动史料整理和重大史实研究”（21STA029）的阶段性成果）

Online editor: Tongxin

网络编辑：同心