Grasping the Key Points in the Theoretical Elaboration of the “Two Integrations”

The “Two Integrations” [1]1 The “Two Integrations” refers to the integration of the fundamental tenets of Marxism with China’s specific realities and with the fine traditional Chinese culture, a key theoretical formulation of Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era. are a major theoretical innovation of our Party in the New Era, and their profound connotations and far-reaching significance require in-depth theoretical elaboration. The key to theoretically elaborating the “Two Integrations” is to clearly understand the foundational and core question of “what exactly is integration,” and to clarify the core concept of “integration.” Whether one is comprehensively studying the “Two Integrations” or focusing specifically on the “Second Integration,” it is necessary first to clarify what “integration” actually is, to establish “integration” as an important theoretical concept or philosophical category, and to define and clarify it theoretically. “Integration” has both rich connotations and broad applicability, as well as relatively clear theoretical definitions and conceptual boundaries. Once we avoid a vague understanding of “integration,” we have a foundation and direction for further deepening research.

“两个结合”是我们党在新时代的重大理论创新，其深邃内涵和深远意义需要从学理上深入阐释。学理化阐释“两个结合”，关键是要搞清楚“究竟什么是结合”这一基础性、核心性问题，澄明“结合”这一核心概念。不论是全面研究“两个结合”，还是重点关注“第二个结合”，都必须首先搞清楚究竟什么是“结合”，把“结合”作为一个重要的理论概念或哲学范畴确立起来，并加以学理界定和澄明。“结合”既有丰富的内涵和广泛的适用性，又有相对明确的理论界定和思想边界。当我们避免了对“结合”的笼统理解之后，就有了进一步深化研究的基础和方向。

1

1

As a philosophical concept, “integration” has a specific meaning and important status in dialectical materialism. “Integration” is a phenomenon that frequently occurs and is universally present in the world. This phenomenon requires a generalized conceptual expression, and thus “integration” should become an important concept. This concept has profound ideological content and philosophical implications; in a certain sense, it is a philosophical category. Because it reflects the dialectical relationships between specific things, we must observe and grasp the phenomenon of integration from the perspective of dialectical materialism, and define the concept of “integration.” From this perspective, so-called “integration” refers to the state of mutual connection and unification that occurs between different things based on practical needs and inherent compatibility, as well as the developmental trend of their fusion into a new thing. Marx said that the coexistence, struggle, and fusion of two mutually contradictory aspects into a new category constitute the essence of the dialectical movement. [2]2 A reference to Marx’s formulation in *The Poverty of Philosophy* (1847), where he describes the dialectical movement of contradiction. Thus, in dialectical materialism, integration is not only a category of the universal interconnection view, embodying the deep connections between specific things, but also a category of contradiction theory, embodying the transformation and fusion of the two sides of a contradiction, and is an important manifestation of the law of the unity of opposites. The phenomenon of integration in human activity refers to people closely linking two or more things together. Therefore, when discussing the issue of integration, we should adopt more of a subject perspective, examining it from the perspective of people’s social activities.

“结合”作为哲学概念在唯物辩证法中有着特定含义和重要地位。“结合”是世界上经常发生、普遍存在的一种现象，对这种现象需要作出普遍化的概念表达，因而“结合”应该成为一个重要概念。这个概念具有深厚的思想内涵和哲学意蕴，从一定意义上说是一个哲学范畴。由于它反映的是特定事物之间的辩证关系，我们要从唯物辩证法的视野去观察和把握结合现象，并界定“结合”概念。由此来看，所谓“结合”，是指不同事物之间基于现实需要和内在契合性而发生的彼此连结和统合状态，以及融合为一个新事物的发展趋势。马克思说过，两个相互矛盾方面的共存、斗争以及融合成一个新范畴，就是辩证运动的实质。可见，在唯物辩证法中，结合不仅是普遍联系观的范畴，体现着特定事物间的深度关联，而且是一个矛盾论范畴，体现着矛盾双方的转化和融合，是对立统一规律的重要体现。人的活动过程中的结合现象，指人们把两个或两个以上的事物密切联系起来。因此，讨论结合问题要更多站在主体视角，从人们的社会活动来考察。

The concept of “integration” has a specific context and special significance within the Party’s innovative theory. In the process of our Party’s adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times, “integration” has received unprecedented emphasis, ultimately forming the theory of the “Two Integrations.” Within this theoretical framework, “integration” does not refer to any possible integration in human society, but specifically to the integration of the fundamental tenets of Marxism with China’s specific national conditions. Since China’s national conditions include both the actual social conditions and the historical and cultural conditions, the integration of the fundamental tenets of Marxism with China’s national conditions is further concretized into two propositions: first, the integration of the fundamental tenets of Marxism with China’s specific realities, i.e., the “First Integration”; second, the integration of the fundamental tenets of Marxism with the fine traditional Chinese culture, i.e., the “Second Integration.” If the overall integration of the fundamental tenets of Marxism with China’s national conditions reflects the relationship between the universal and the particular, then the “First Integration” specifically embodies the relationship between universal theory and particular practice, while the “Second Integration” specifically embodies the relationship between universal theory and particular historical culture. Here, the particularity of the “Second Integration” requires special attention. This is because both the relationship between the universal and the particular, and the relationship between theory and practice, are issues we are relatively familiar with and have historically focused on, issues with rich experience of success. However, the relationship between Marxism and fine traditional Chinese culture is the relationship between the theoretical foundation of our Party’s guiding ideology and local resources, i.e., the relationship between the “soul” and the “root.” Grasping the relationship between the two, especially their integration, cannot simply apply the paradigm of integrating theory with practice from the past; instead, new efforts must be made to explore it.

“结合”概念在党的创新理论中有其特定语境和特殊意义。在我们党推进马克思主义中国化时代化的过程中，“结合”得到了前所未有的强调，并最终形成了“两个结合”的理论。在这一理论框架中，“结合”不是泛指人类社会中一些可能的结合，而是特指马克思主义基本原理与中国具体国情的结合，由于中国国情包括社会现实国情和历史文化国情，因而马克思主义基本原理与中国国情的结合又具体化为两个命题：一是马克思主义基本原理同中国具体实际相结合，即“第一个结合”；二是马克思主义基本原理同中华优秀传统文化相结合，即“第二个结合”。如果说马克思主义基本原理与中国国情总体的结合体现的是普遍与特殊的关系，那么“第一个结合”具体体现的是普遍性理论与特殊性实践的关系，“第二个结合”具体体现的是普遍性理论与特殊性历史文化的关系。在此，“第二个结合”的特殊性是尤需特别关注的。因为无论是普遍性与特殊性的关系，还是理论与实践的关系，都是我们相对熟悉和历来关注的问题，是有丰富成功经验的问题。而马克思主义与中华优秀传统文化的关系问题是我们党的指导思想的理论基础与本土资源的关系，即“魂”与“根”的关系。把握二者的关系，特别是二者的结合，不能套用以往的理论与实践相结合的范式，而要重新着力探索。

We must not only grasp the theoretical essence of “integration,” but also reveal its internal mechanism. To clarify “integration” itself, it is necessary not only to theoretically define its conceptual connotation and extension and grasp its essence, but also to further reveal the internal mechanisms and workings of “integration.” That is to say, we must clarify how “integration” actually occurs, how it proceeds, and how it is realized. This is not only necessary for explaining the concept of “integration” clearly, but is also particularly important for resolving the blockages and bottlenecks in current research. Current research on “integration” itself mostly remains at the level of confirming its organic nature, stating that it is not a mechanical patchwork but an organic integration. However, what “organic integration” itself actually entails still requires research. If we cannot clarify its internal mechanism, we will be unable to explain “integration” theoretically, nor can we operate it practically.

我们不仅要把握“结合”的理论本质，还要揭示其内在机理。弄清“结合”本身，不仅要从理论上界定其概念内涵和外延，把握其本质，而且要进一步揭示“结合”的内部机制和机理。也就是说，要弄清“结合”究竟是怎样发生的，是怎样进行和怎样实现的，这不仅对于说清楚“结合”概念十分必要，而且对于解决当前研究的堵点和卡点是尤为重要的。当前对“结合”本身的研究，大多停留在对“结合”的有机性的确认上，说明它不是机械拼凑，而是有机结合。但对于“有机结合”本身究竟是怎样的仍然需要研究。如果不能弄清其内部机理，就无法从理论上把“结合”说清楚，也无法在实践中实际操作。

To clarify the internal mechanism of “integration,” it is necessary to propose and elucidate the concept of “mode of integration.” Proposing this new concept aims to reveal the mode of presentation and mode of realization of “integration.” For human activities, especially collective activities, there is always a question of “mode,” i.e., the form in which the activity is carried out. In a certain sense, it can even be said that a certain activity is a certain mode of activity, and grasping the mode of activity is equivalent to grasping the activity itself. We know that the “mode of production” is an important category of historical materialism. It gradually evolved from a relatively specific concept into a more general overarching category, becoming the theoretical expression of the organic unity of productive forces and relations of production. Only by grasping the “mode of production” can we deeply grasp “production” itself. Similarly, only by grasping the “mode of life” can we deeply grasp “life” itself; only by grasping the “mode of thinking” can we deeply grasp “thinking” itself; and so on. Therefore, only by grasping the “mode of integration” can we deeply grasp “integration” itself. The mode of integration reflects different types of integration of things and is itself an inherent standard and rule for classification. The mode of integration also embodies the choice of paths and methods for realizing integration; clarifying the mode of integration clarifies the paths and methods for realizing integration.

要想弄清“结合”的内在机理，就需要提出和阐明“结合方式”这一概念。提出这个新概念，旨在揭示“结合”的呈现方式和实现方式。对于人类的活动，特别是集体性活动来说，都存在一个“方式”问题，即以何种形式开展的问题。从一定意义上甚至可以说，某种活动就是某种活动方式，对活动方式的把握也就是对活动本身的把握。我们知道，“生产方式”是唯物史观的重要范畴，它从一个相对具体的概念逐步演变为更有概括性的总体范畴，成为生产力与生产关系有机统一的理论表达。只有把握了“生产方式”，才能深刻把握“生产”本身。同样，只有把握了“生活方式”才能深刻把握“生活”本身，只有把握了“思维方式”才能深刻把握“思维”本身，等等。因而，只有把握了“结合方式”，才能深刻把握“结合”本身。结合方式体现了事物结合的不同类型，本身就是一种内在的分类标准和规则。结合方式也体现了实现结合的路径和方法选择，弄清了结合方式也就明晰了实现结合的路径和方法。

“Integration” is diverse, and the “modes of integration” are also diverse. “Integration” is a very broad phenomenon, and the concept of “integration” is quite extensive, encompassing multiple modes and types. If we focus on directional grasp, we can divide the modes of integration into two basic types: first, external integration, mechanical splicing; second, internal integration, organic integration. Perhaps mechanical splicing and external integration are difficult to completely avoid under certain conditions, especially in the early stages of exploration. However, only when internal organic integration is achieved can the essence and typical characteristics of “integration” be truly embodied. General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out, “‘Integration’ is not a ‘patchwork,’ not a simple ‘physical reaction,’ but a profound ‘chemical reaction,’ creating an organically unified new cultural life form.” [3]3 A quotation from Xi Jinping’s speech at a symposium on cultural heritage in 2023, emphasizing the transformative nature of the integration. What is emphasized here is precisely internal, organic integration. This important statement points the way for us. We must conduct concrete explorations along this direction, further dividing and grasping the types of integration.

“结合”具有多样性，“结合方式”也是多种多样的。“结合”是一种十分广泛的现象，“结合”概念也相当宽泛，其中包含多种方式和类型。如果我们着眼于方向性把握，就可以把结合方式分为两种基本类型：一是外在的结合、机械的拼合，二是内在的结合、有机的结合。也许机械的拼凑、外在的结合在一定条件下，特别是在初期探索阶段是难以完全避免的，但只有达成内在的有机结合时，才能真正体现“结合”的本质和典型特征。习近平总书记指出，“‘结合’不是‘拼盘’，不是简单的‘物理反应’，而是深刻的‘化学反应’，造就了一个有机统一的新的文化生命体”，所强调的正是内在的、有机的结合。这一重要论述为我们指明了方向，我们要沿着这个方向进行具体探索，进一步划分和把握结合类型。

2

2

The “First Integration” has its specific connotation and mode. Historically, regarding this integration, the dogmatists within the Party lacked relevant understanding; they did not think about carrying out “integration,” but believed it was sufficient to directly apply the writings of the classical authors. Comrade Mao Zedong explicitly stated, “Marxist ‘books’ must be studied, but they must be integrated with China’s actual conditions.” [4]4 A paraphrase of Mao Zedong’s argument in his 1930 essay “Oppose Book Worship,” which criticized dogmatic reliance on Marxist texts. This itself was a major innovation. At the same time, Comrade Mao Zedong also proposed the proposition of “adapting Marxism to the Chinese context,” advocating the use of Sinicized theory to guide Chinese practice, further resolving the issue of the mode of integration. Applying the universal truths of Marxism to China’s reality advanced the cause of the Chinese revolution and construction, and formed the theoretical achievements of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context. In this way, universality and particularity, theory and practice, were unified within the Party’s guiding ideology, making the Party’s guiding ideology a theoretical system that includes both the fundamental tenets of Marxism and the theoretical achievements of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times.

“第一个结合”有其特定内涵和方式。对于这个结合，历史上党内教条主义者是缺乏相关认识的，他们并没有想到要进行“结合”，而是认为只需直接搬用经典作家的论述。毛泽东同志明确提出，“马克思主义的‘本本’是要学习的，但是必须同我国的实际情况相结合”，这本身就是一个重大创新。同时，毛泽东同志还提出了“马克思主义中国化”命题，主张用中国化理论指导中国实践，进一步解决了结合方式问题。把马克思主义普遍真理运用于中国实际，推进了中国革命和建设事业，并形成马克思主义中国化理论成果。这样就把普遍性与特殊性、理论性与实践性统一于党的指导思想之中，使党的指导思想成为一个既包含马克思主义基本原理，又包括马克思主义中国化时代化理论成果的思想理论系统。

The “Second Integration” should also have its own mode of realization. “Adapting Marxism to the Chinese context” is both the mode of realization for the “First Integration” and for the “Second Integration.” However, the “Second Integration” differs from the “First Integration” because it does not resolve the relationship between theory and practice, but rather the relationship between two types of ideology and culture; thus, it is necessary to consider the mode of integration from a cultural perspective. The temporal and spatial conditions under which these two cultures emerged differ: one emerged in modern Western Europe, the other in ancient China. Due to the necessity of historical development, they coexist in the same social time and space in modern China, interact and influence each other, and enter a process of gradual integration. To better advance the “Second Integration,” we need to clarify what possible or effective modes of integration exist. Broadly speaking, we can further advance the “Second Integration” from the aspects of language, scholarship, theory, and practice.

“第二个结合”也应该有自身的实现方式。“马克思主义中国化”既是“第一个结合”的结合方式，也是“第二个结合”的结合方式。但是，“第二个结合”又不同于“第一个结合”，因为它解决的不是理论与实践的关系，而是两种思想文化间的关系，因而需要从文化视角思考结合方式问题。这两种文化产生的时空条件不同：一个产生于近代的西欧，一个产生于古代的中国。由于历史发展的必然性，二者在现代中国共处于同一个社会时空中，并发生联系和相互作用，进入了逐渐结合的过程。为了更好地推进“第二个结合”，我们需要弄清究竟有哪些可能的或有效的结合方式。大体来说，我们可以从语言、学术、理论、实践等方面进一步推进“第二个结合”。

Integration at the linguistic level means making Marxism speak Chinese, using the Chinese language to translate Marxist classics, and using the Chinese language to conduct Marxist theoretical research and elucidation. This mode of integration may seem superficial, even somewhat external, but it is also very necessary and forms the basis for other integrations. Chinese characters and the Chinese language are an important component of fine traditional Chinese culture and an important vehicle for its transmission. Using the Chinese language to express Marxist theory enables the “Second Integration” to proceed in the mother tongue. Here, the first issue is the Chinese translation of Marxist classics. Currently, the major classics have been translated into standard modern Chinese by relevant institutions, ensuring reliability and authority. Of course, the international compilation of the new historical-critical edition of the *Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe* (MEGA²) is still ongoing, and our new Chinese-language complete works are being published in installments; full completion will take time. This work should be viewed and advanced from the perspective of promoting the “Two Integrations,” especially the “Second Integration.” We should further refine Marxist theoretical terms and concepts in modern Chinese and improve the Chinese linguistic norms for expressing Marxist theory. The languages primarily used by the classical writers were German and Russian, which differ greatly from Chinese in vocabulary and syntax. Their modes of expression have their own characteristics and advantages, but as Chinese Marxist theoretical workers, our narration of Marxist theory should better reflect Chinese grammatical habits, especially the conciseness and efficiency of Chinese grammar.

语言层面的结合，就是让马克思主义说中国话，用中国语言翻译马克思主义经典著作，用中国语言进行马克思主义理论研究和阐释。这种结合方式似乎是一种浅层的，甚至有些外在的结合方式，但它也是十分必要的，而且构成其他结合的基础。汉语汉字是中华优秀传统文化的重要组成部分，也是重要传承载体，用汉语表达马克思主义理论，能够使“第二个结合”以母语方式进行。这里首先是马克思主义经典著作的中译问题，现在主要的经典著作都已由相关机构译为规范的现代汉语，具有可靠性和权威性。当然，国际上《马克思恩格斯全集》新的历史考证版（MEGA2）的编纂还在进行之中，我们的中文新版全集也在陆续出版，全部完成尚有待时日。要从推进“两个结合”特别是“第二个结合”的高度去看待和推进这项工作。还应进一步锤炼现代汉语中的马克思主义理论术语和概念，完善马克思主义理论表达的汉语规范。经典作家使用的语言主要是德语和俄语，在词汇和句法方面与中文有很大差异。其表达方式有自身特色和优点，但作为中国马克思主义理论工作者，对马克思主义理论的叙述应该更加体现中国人语法习惯，特别是体现中文语法的简洁高效。

Marxism and fine traditional Chinese culture are two types of ideology and culture, and also two academic traditions. Their integration certainly includes the dimension of academic research, and this is extremely important. Only by consciously carrying out relevant academic research can we provide solid academic support for the “Second Integration.” This academic work lies not only in separately studying Marxist theory or fine traditional Chinese culture, but even more in studying the relationship between the two, especially conducting comprehensive, systematic, and in-depth research on their integration. We must study not only the necessity and inevitability of integration, but also its possibility and actuality; not only the essence and structure of integration, but also the effective paths and measures to realize it. In research, we must adhere to a problem-oriented approach, committed to solving the various problems arising in the process of integration; strengthen the construction of an academic community, and advance research work related to the “Second Integration” through organized, large-scale scientific research. In particular, we must strengthen the synergy and integration of two academic teams: one is the team of scholars engaged in Marxist studies, and the other is the team of scholars engaged in the study of fine traditional Chinese culture. We should break down cognitive limitations and academic barriers, and jointly advance academic research work closely centered on the “Second Integration.”

马克思主义和中华优秀传统文化是两种思想文化，也是两种学术传统。二者的结合，当然包含着学术研究的层面，而且是极其重要的。因为只有自觉开展相关学术研究，才能为“第二个结合”提供坚实学术支撑。这项学术工作不仅在于分别研究马克思主义理论或中华优秀传统文化，而更在于研究二者的关系，特别是围绕二者的结合进行全面系统而深入的研究。不仅要研究二者结合的必要性和必然性，而且要研究结合的可能性和现实性；不仅要研究结合的本质和结构，而且要研究实现结合的有效路径和举措。在研究中要坚持问题导向，致力于解决结合过程中产生的不同问题；加强学术共同体建设，以有组织的规模化科研推进“第二个结合”的相关研究工作。特别要加强两支学术队伍的协同与融合：一是从事马克思主义研究的学者队伍，二是从事中华优秀传统文化研究的学者队伍。应打破认知局限和学术壁垒，紧紧围绕“第二个结合”共同推进学术研究工作。

Continuously advancing the Party’s theoretical innovation is itself the main mode of realization for the “Second Integration.” The Party’s series of theoretical innovation achievements are not only the fruits of the “First Integration,” but also the crystallization of the “Second Integration.” In different stages of the Party’s struggle over more than a century, this integration has already been underway, and rich theoretical results have been achieved. Mao Zedong Thought and the system of theories of socialism with Chinese characteristics all embody the Chinese Communists’ absorption, transformation, and innovation of fine traditional Chinese culture. Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era, in particular, more prominently embodies the “Second Integration” and showcases the style of Chinese culture. Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era is an open and developing theoretical system. As the cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics for a New Era continues to advance, it will inevitably be further enriched and developed, and the “Second Integration” will inevitably be further advanced.

不断推进党的理论创新，本身就是“第二个结合”的主要实现方式。党的一系列理论创新成果，不仅是“第一个结合”的成果，也是“第二个结合”的结晶。在我们党一百多年奋斗的不同阶段，已经进行着这种结合了，而且取得了丰富理论成果。毛泽东思想、中国特色社会主义理论体系，都体现着中国共产党人对中华优秀传统文化的吸取、转化和创新。特别是习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想，更突出地体现了“第二个结合”，展现中华文化的风采。习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想是一个开放发展的理论体系，随着新时代中国特色社会主义事业的不断推进，必将得到进一步丰富发展，“第二个结合”也必将得到进一步推进。

The foundation of theory lies in practice, and the driving force for its development also lies in practice. Advancing the “Second Integration” under new historical conditions requires not only the method of theoretical innovation, but also the method of practical innovation. The great practice of socialism with Chinese characteristics for a New Era, especially the great practice of comprehensively advancing the building of a strong country and the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation through Chinese-path modernization, is the source and driving force for the Party’s theoretical innovation and development, and also the source and driving force for our Party to further advance the “Second Integration.” Whether advancing the “Second Integration” through language and discourse, or through scholarship and theory, it cannot be separated from the great practice of socialism with Chinese characteristics for a New Era. Undoubtedly, the scope of this practice far exceeds the realm of ideology and culture, but it is the foundation and destination of cultural work. Theoretical workers committed to advancing the “Second Integration” from a professional perspective must all throw themselves into the construction and reform practices of the new journey, continuously advance the “Two Integrations,” form a strong synergy, and promote the continuous development of the cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics.

理论的根基在实践，发展动力也在实践。在新的历史条件下推进“第二个结合”，不仅要运用理论创新的方式，而且要运用实践创新的方式。新时代中国特色社会主义伟大实践，特别是以中国式现代化全面推进强国建设、民族复兴伟业的伟大实践，是党的理论创新发展的源泉和动力，也是我们党进一步推进“第二个结合”的源泉和动力。不论是以语言和话语的方式推进“第二个结合”，还是以学术和理论的方式推进“第二个结合”，都不能脱离新时代中国特色社会主义伟大实践。无疑，这一实践的范围远远超越了思想文化领域，但它是文化工作的基础和归宿。致力于从专业性方面推进“第二个结合”的理论工作者，都要投身于新征程的建设与改革实践中，持续推进“两个结合”，形成强大合力，推动中国特色社会主义事业不断向前发展。

(Author: Liu Jianjun, Professor at the School of Marxism Studies, Renmin University of China)

（作者：刘建军，系中国人民大学马克思主义学院教授）

Online Editor: Huihui

网络编辑：慧慧