本文關鍵詞：宗教批判的批判：論馬克思與青年黑格爾派的關系，由筆耕文化傳播整理發(fā)布。

        1835年，隨著大衛(wèi)·施特勞斯《耶穌傳》一書的出版，青年黑格爾派掀起了德意志宗教批判的熱潮。早期的馬克思曾深受青年黑格爾派宗教批判理論的影響，也通過《神圣家族》、《關于費爾巴哈的提綱》以及《黑格爾法哲學批判導言》等著作表達了他自己對于宗教批判的觀點。那么早年的馬克思如何繼承了青年黑格爾派的思想呢？他們的宗教批判理論有何不同之處？青年馬克思的思想與他后期的理論之間存在著怎樣的邏輯關系？本文試圖圍繞這三條邏輯主線展開研究。青年黑格爾派是資產(chǎn)階級民主反對派在哲學上的表現(xiàn)。當時生活在普魯士封建統(tǒng)治之中的青年黑格爾派成員們，受到法蘭西資產(chǎn)階級自由民主風的熏陶，滿懷希望地改造普魯士落后的現(xiàn)狀。根據(jù)他們的導師黑格爾的觀點，“宗教和哲學一起，成為人類精神生活的最高形式，”①而在當時的德國恰由這種人類精神生活的最高形式維護著普魯士舊政權的統(tǒng)治。因此青年黑格爾派認為，，如果想改變當時的政治現(xiàn)狀，就要從保衛(wèi)政治的宗教精神出發(fā)，使宗教批判成為政治批判的先導�！拔覀兊聡嗽谡紊系淖杂�，只能隨著我們在精神上、道德上和宗教上的自我解放而增長�！雹谒�，青年黑格爾派的主要任務就是批判宗教，試圖通過對宗教的改造和消解達到政治的解放。而精神的永久否定原則一直是青年黑格爾派中壓倒一切的主題，青年黑格爾派根據(jù)這一原則對宗教展開了暴風雨般的批判。如果說施特勞斯的宗教批判還只是針對《福音書》中個別故事情節(jié)和“圣子”耶穌的批判，那么鮑威爾的進步之處就在于對整個基督教進行批判，他將施特勞斯在基督教中僅存的一點理性因素也完全清理掉，認為不僅基督教中的神跡和上帝是個人理性有意識的虛構，就連基督教的產(chǎn)生也是人類理性自身分裂而導致的結果。他使基督教成為一般意義上的宗教現(xiàn)象，從而使費爾巴哈對宗教哲學的批判成為可能。在青年黑格爾派中，費爾巴哈第一次從人本學和唯物主義的視角對宗教展開了批判。他認為，宗教不是應該怎樣符合人的理性的問題，而是怎樣符合自然的人的問題。宗教并不是“自我意識”等人的理性異化的產(chǎn)物，而是“人的類本質(zhì)”的異化，這樣的人是以自然為基礎的人，宗教是出于人的類本質(zhì)對普愛的追求，是表達人的類本質(zhì)的完美載體。他作為最早批判黑格爾的人之一，認為黑格爾主義和各種唯心主義一樣，只不過是宗教虛構的延續(xù)。費爾巴哈基于人本學的宗教批判和基于唯物主義的黑格爾哲學批判，對馬克思思想的形成產(chǎn)生了巨大的影響。但是具有懷疑精神的馬克思并沒有全盤接受青年黑格爾派的思想，而是在接受與反思他們思想的過程中，逐步理清了自身進行宗教批判的特有邏輯，由此實現(xiàn)了批判宗教立場上的一次重大的轉向。馬克思對青年黑格爾派思想的重大的變革首先表現(xiàn)在他對鮑威爾和費爾巴哈關于異化理論的改造上。馬克思認為，雖然宗教是異化產(chǎn)生的結果，但宗教產(chǎn)生的根源不在于自我意識的異化，也不在于人的抽象的“類本質(zhì)”的異化，而在于現(xiàn)實中人的異化。所謂現(xiàn)實的人是指，在一定的社會關系中的人，是與其他的人發(fā)生各種物質(zhì)利益的聯(lián)系和矛盾的人。這種現(xiàn)實的社會狀況使本屬于人自身的本質(zhì)——即勞動發(fā)生了異化，使勞動和勞動產(chǎn)品反過來成為控制人的力量存在，產(chǎn)生了使勞動者倍受肉體和精神折磨的社會。宗教神學是這種現(xiàn)實狀況的產(chǎn)物，因而反宗教的斗爭便是反對以宗教為精神慰藉的那個世界的斗爭。因此，宗教批判的最終目的在于消除人的異化，消滅私有財產(chǎn)，實現(xiàn)人類的解放。由此，馬克思宗教批判的總體思路和方向便發(fā)生了實質(zhì)性的轉變：由于宗教批判的最終根據(jù)在于人的本質(zhì)的復歸，那么不是宗教批判要成為政治批判的先導，而是政治批判要成為宗教批判的前提，確切地說，是人類解放成為宗教解放的前提。

    In1835, with the publication of David Strauss’ Life of Jesus, Young Hegeliansraised a wave of German religion critique. Young Marx has deeply effected by thereligion critique theory of Young Hegelians, he also expressed his opinion about thereligious critique through The Holy Family, Theses on Feuerbach and the Preface ofHegel’s Legal Philosophy. So young Marx how to inherit the Young Hegelians’thought? What are the differences between them? What’s the logical relationshipbetween his early thought and his later theory? This essay tries to do the researchround the three logical mainlines.Young Hegelians is the performance of the Bourgeois democratic opposition in philosophy. That time the numbers of Young Hegelians who lived in the Prussian feudal rule, under The French bourgeois liberal democracy influence, they transform the current situation of the Prussian hopefully. According to their mentor Hegel’s point of view ‘Religion and philosophy, as the highest form of human spiritual life’ And in Germany at that time, Prussia, the rule of the old regime Just by this highest form of humanspiritual life maintained. So Young Hegelians think, If you want to change the political status quo, you should start from defending political religious spirit, To make religious criticism as political criticism’s guide ‘We Germans freedom in political can only growth with our spiritual moral and religious emancipation.’ So, The main task of young Hegel’s is religious criticism, and to achieve the purpose of political liberation by transform or digest religion. However the spirit’s permanent negative principle is alwaysas the overriding theme in Young Hegelians, Young Hegelians according to this principle launched a storm of criticism of religion.If Strauss’ religion critique is only is only aimed at individual story and Jesus,then Bauer’s progress is criticize to the whole Christian. Bauer cleared all the rational factors which remained by Strauss, believe that not only the miracle and the god ismade up by individual’s conscious fiction, but also the naissance of Christianity is theresult of reason abruption. He made the Christianity as a general sense of religiousphenomena, which made it possible to Feuerbach’s critique of the religion philosophy.In Young Hegelians, Feuerbach through humanism and materialism launchedcriticism of religion first time. He thought that religion is not the problem of how toaccord with human’s rational, but how to conform to the nature of man. Religion isnot the production of human’s rational, like sense of self, but is alienation of thenature of human. This kind of human is the man who base on nature, religion is thepursuit of general love based on nature of human, and it is a perfect carrier ofexpressing human nature. As one of the earliest philosophers who criticized Hegel, hethought that like all kinds of idealism, Hegelianism is just a kind of extend ofreligious fiction. Feuerbach’s religious criticism which based on humanism and he’sCriticism of the Hegel’s philosophy which based on materialism, have a hugeinfluence on the formation of Marx’s thought.But skeptical Marx did not accept all the Young Hegelians thoughts. In theprocess of accepting and reflecting on their ideas, Marx gradually clarify the logic ofhis religion critique, thus made a turn of the position of religion critique. Marx madethe first important change on his transformation of the alienation theory whichbelongs to Bauer and Feuerbach. He affirmed that although religion is a result ofalienation, the radical case of religion is not the alienation of self consciousness, notthe alienation of abstract ‘generic nature’, but the alienation of realistic human being.Realistic human being refers to a person in certain social relations, who has thecontact and conflict of material interests with other people. The social status madelabor, which belongs to human nature become alienated. Labor and labor products inturn control human beings, this situation produce a society that suffers both workers’body and mind. Religious Divinity is the product of this reality, thereforeanti-religious struggle is a fight with the world that employs the religion as a mentalcomfort. So the ultimate goal of religion critique is to eliminate the alienation of thepeople, to perish private property, and achieve the emancipation of humanity. Thus, Marx’s whole idea and direction of religion critique have substantive changes: As thereligion critique ultimately rests on the reversion of human nature, it’s not the guide ofpolitical criticism, but political criticism to be the premise of religion critique. Ormore precisely, human liberation is the premise of religion liberation.

宗教批判的批判：論馬克思與青年黑格爾派的關系

中文摘要4-6Abstract6-8引言10-11一、 青年黑格爾派的宗教批判11-16    （一） 青年黑格爾派宗教批判思想概述11-14    （二） 費爾巴哈的宗教批判理論14-16二、 馬克思實現(xiàn)的宗教批判理論的變革16-24    （一） 異化理論的改造16-18    （二） 宗教批判根據(jù)的轉換18-21    （三） 從宗教解放到人類解放21-24三、 馬克思宗教批判理論的意義24-28    （一） 青年黑格爾派對馬克思的影響24-25    （二） 宗教批判理論變革的意義25-28結語28-30參考文獻30-32致謝32

  本文關鍵詞：宗教批判的批判：論馬克思與青年黑格爾派的關系，由筆耕文化傳播整理發(fā)布。