马克思：《黑格尔法哲学批判》英文版封面

【 编者按 】 《<黑格尔法哲学批判>导言》写于1843年10月中—12月，1844年2月在《德法年鉴》公开发表，原文是德文。《导言》是马克思为当时还未完成的《黑格尔法哲学批判》的出版而撰写的。在《导言》中，马克思首次阐明了无产阶级的历史使命，指出无产阶级是唯一能够消灭任何奴役、实现人的解放的阶级，并论述了无产阶级和哲学的关系，指出“哲学把无产阶级当做自己的物质武器，同样，无产阶级也把哲学当做自己的精神武器”。 《黑格尔法哲学批判》是马克思批判黑格尔哲学的第一部著作。1843年夏天写于莱茵省的克罗茨纳赫，故又称《克罗茨纳赫手稿》。原稿共39张，没有标题，现标题是1927年苏联共产党（布尔什维克）中央马克思列宁主义研究院发表这一手稿时加的。这里搜集马克思这一文献的中英文版本，以飨读者。

Works of Karl Marx 1843

A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right

Introduction

________________________________________

Written: December 1843-January 1844;

First published: in Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher, 7 & 10 February 1844 in Paris;

Tranion: the source and date of tranion is unknown. It was proofed and corrected by Andy Blunden, February 2005, and corrected by Matthew Carmody in 2009.

________________________________________

For Germany, the criticism of religion has been essentially completed, and the criticism of religion is the prerequisite of all criticism.

就德国来说，对宗教的批判基本上已经结束；而对宗教的批判是其他一切批判的前提。

The profane existence of error is compromised as soon as its heavenly oratio pro aris et focis [“speech for the altars and hearths,” i.e., for God and country] has been refuted. Man, who has found only the reflection of himself in the fantastic reality of heaven, where he sought a superman, will no longer feel disposed to find the mere appearance of himself, the non-man [Unmensch], where he seeks and must seek his true reality.

谬误在天国为神祗所作的雄辩［oratio pro aris et focis①]一经驳倒，它在人间的存在就声誉扫地了。一个人，如果想在天国这一幻想的现实性中寻找超人，而找到的只是他自身的反映，他就再也不想在他正在寻找和应当寻找自己的真正现实性的地方，只去寻找他自身的映象，只去寻找非人了。

The foundation of irreligious criticism is: Man makes religion, religion does not make man. Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man – state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopaedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d’honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.

反宗教的批判的根据是：人创造了宗教，而不是宗教创造人。就是说，宗教是还没有获得自身或已经再度丧失自身的人的自我意识和自我感觉。但是，人不是抽象的蛰居干世界之外的存在物。人就是人的世界，就是国家，社会。这个国家、这个社会产生了宗教，一种颠倒的世界意识，因为它们就是颠倒的世界。宗教是这个世界的总理论，是它的包罗万象的纲要，它的具有通俗形式的逻辑，它的唯灵论的荣誉问题［point d’honneur】，它的狂热，它的道德约束，它的庄严补充，它借以求得慰藉和辩护的总根据。宗教是人的本质在幻想中的实现，因为人的本质不具有真正的现实性。因此，反宗教的斗争间接地就是反对以宗教为精神抚慰的那个世界的斗争。

Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

宗教里的苦难既是现实的苦难的表现，又是对这种现实的苦难的抗议。宗教是被压迫生灵的叹息，是无情世界的心境，正像它是无精神活力的制度的精神一样。宗教是人民的鸦片。

The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.

废除作为人民的虚幻幸福的宗教，就是要求人民的现实幸福。要求抛弃关于人民处境的幻觉，就是要求抛弃那需要幻觉的处境。因此，对宗教的批判就是对苦难尘世——宗教是它的神圣光环——的批判的胚芽。

Criticism has plucked the imaginary flowers on the chain not in order that man shall continue to bear that chain without fantasy or consolation, but so that he shall throw off the chain and pluck the living flower. The criticism of religion disillusions man, so that he will think, act, and fashion his reality like a man who has discarded his illusions and regained his senses, so that he will move around himself as his own true Sun. Religion is only the illusory Sun which revolves around man as long as he does not revolve around himself.

这种批判撕碎锁链上那些虚构的花朵，不是要人依旧戴上没有幻想没有慰藉的锁链，而是要人扔掉它，采摘新鲜的花朵。对宗教的批判使人不抱幻想，使人能够作为不抱幻想而具有理智的人来思考，来行动，来建立自己的现实；使他能够围绕着自身和自己现实的太阳转动。宗教只是虚幻的太阳，当人没有围绕自身转动的时候，它总是围绕着人转动。

It is, therefore, the task of history, once the other-world of truth has vanished, to establish the truth of this world. It is the immediate task of philosophy, which is in the service of history, to unmask self-estrangement in its unholy forms once the holy form of human self-estrangement has been unmasked. Thus, the criticism of Heaven turns into the criticism of Earth, the criticism of religion into the criticism of law, and the criticism of theology into the criticism of politics.

因此，真理的彼岸世界消逝以后，历史的任务就是确立此岸世界的真理。人的自我异化的神圣形象被揭穿以后，揭露具有非神圣形象的自我异化，就成了为历史服务的哲学的迫切任务。于是，对天国的批判变成对尘世的批判，对宗教的批判变成对法的批判，对神学的批判变成对政治的批判。

The following exposition [a full-scale critical study of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right was supposed to follow this introduction] – a contribution to this undertaking – concerns itself not directly with the original but with a copy, with the German philosophy of the state and of law. The only reason for this is that it is concerned with Germany.

随导言之后将要作的探讨2—这是为这项工作尽的一份力—首先不是联系原本，而是联系副本即联系德国的国家哲学和法哲学来进行的。其所以如此，正是因为这一探讨是联系德国进行的。

If we were to begin with the German status quo itself, the result – even if we were to do it in the only appropriate way, i.e., negatively – would still be an anachronism. Even the negation of our present political situation is a dusty fact in the historical junk room of modern nations. If I negate powdered pigtails, I am still left with unpowdered pigtails. If I negate the situation in Germany in 1843, then according to the French calendar I have barely reached 1789, much less the vital centre of our present age.

如果想从德国的现状［status quo]本身出发，即使采取唯一适 当的方式，就是说采取否定的方式，结果依然是时代错乱。即使对我国当代政治状况的否定，也已经是现代各国的历史废旧物品堆藏室中布满灰尘的史实。即使我否定了敷粉的发辫，我还是要同没有敷粉的发辫打交道。即使我否定了1843年的德国制度，但是按照法国的纪年，我也不会处在1789年，更不会是处在当代的焦点。

Indeed, German history prides itself on having travelled a road which no other nation in the whole of history has ever travelled before, or ever will again. We have shared the restorations of modern nations without ever having shared their revolutions. We have been restored, firstly, because other nations dared to make revolutions, and, secondly, because other nations suffered counter-revolutions; on the one hand, because our masters were afraid, and, on the other, because they were not afraid. With our shepherds to the fore, we only once kept company with freedom, on the day of its internment.

不错，德国历史自夸有过一个运动，在历史的长空中，没有一个国家曾经是这个运动的先行者，将来也不会是这个运动的模仿者。我们没有同现代各国一起经历革命，却同它们一起经历复辟。我们经历了复辟，首先是因为其他国家敢于进行革命，其次是因为其他国家受到反革命的危害；在第一种情形下，是因为我们的统治者们害怕了，在第二种情形下，是因为我们的统治者们并没有害怕。我们，在我们的那些牧羊人带领下，总是只有一次与自由为伍，那就是在自由被埋葬的那一天。

One school of thought that legitimizes the infamy of today with the infamy of yesterday, a school that stigmatizes every cry of the serf against the knout as mere rebelliousness once the knout has aged a little and acquired a hereditary significance and a history, a school to which history shows nothing but its a posteriori, as did the God of Israel to his servant Moses, the historical school of law – this school would have invented German history were it not itself an invention of that history. A Shylock, but a cringing Shylock, that swears by its bond, its historical bond, its Christian-Germanic bond, for every pound of flesh cut from the heart of the people.

有个学派以昨天的卑鄙行为来说明今天的卑鄙行为是合法的，有个学派把农奴反抗鞭子—只要鞭子是陈旧的、祖传的、历史的鞭子—的每一声呐喊都宣布为叛乱；正像以色列上帝对他的奴仆摩西一样，历史对这一学派也只是显示了自己的后背a posteriori①]，因此，这个历史法学派3本身如果不是德国历史的杜撰，那就是它杜撰了德国历史。这个夏洛克，却是奴才夏洛克，他发誓要凭他所持的借据，即历史的借据、基督教日耳曼的借据来索取从人民胸口割下的每一磅肉。

Good-natured enthusiasts, Germanomaniacs by extraction and free-thinkers by reflexion, on the contrary, seek our history of freedom beyond our history in the ancient Teutonic forests. But, what difference is there between the history of our freedom and the history of the boar’s freedom if it can be found only in the forests? Besides, it is common knowledge that the forest echoes back what you shout into it. So peace to the ancient Teutonic forests!

相反，那些好心的狂热者，那些具有德意志狂血统并有自由思想的人，却到我们史前的条顿原始森林去寻找我们的自由历史。但是，如果我们的自由历史只能到森林中去找，那么我们的自由历史和野猪的自由历史又有什么区别呢？况且谁都知道，在森林中叫唤什么，森林就发出什么口声。还是让条顿原始森林保持宁静吧！

War on the German state of affairs! By all means! They are below the level of history, they are beneath any criticism, but they are still an object of criticism like the criminal who is below the level of humanity but still an object for the executioner. In the struggle against that state of affairs, criticism is no passion of the head, it is the head of passion. It is not a lancet, it is a weapon. Its object is its enemy, which it wants not to refute but to exterminate. For the spirit of that state of affairs is refuted. In itself, it is no objectworthy of thought, it is an existence which is as despicable as it is despised. Criticism does not need to make things clear to itself as regards this object, for it has already settled accounts with it. It no longer assumes the quality of an end-in-itself, but only of a means. Its essential pathos is indignation, its essential work is denunciation.

向德国制度开火！一定要开火！这种制度虽然低于历史水平，低于任何批判，但依然是批判的对象，正像一个低于做人的水平的罪犯，依然是刽子手的对象一样。在同这种制度进行的斗争中，批判不是头脑的激情，它是激情的头脑。它不是解剖刀，它是武器。它的对象是自己的敌人，它不是要驳倒这个敌人，而是要消灭这个敌人，因为这种制度的精神已经被驳倒。这种制度本身不是值得重视的对象，而是既应当受到鄙视同时又已经受到鄙视的存在状态。对于这一对象，批判本身不用自己表明什么了，因为它对这一对象已经清清楚楚。批判已经不再是目的本身，而只是一种手段。它的主要情感是愤怒，它的主要工作是揭露。

《黑格尔法哲学》英文版封面

It is a case of describing the dull reciprocal pressure of all social spheres one on another, a general inactive ill-humor, a limitedness which recognizes itself as much as it mistakes itself, within the frame of government system which, living on the preservation of all wretchedness, is itself nothing but wretchedness in office.

这是指描述各个社会领域相互施加的无形压力，描述普遍无所事事的沉闷情绪，描述既表现为自大又表现为自卑的狭隘性，而且要在政府制度的范围内加以描述，政府制度是靠维护一切卑劣事物为生的，它本身无非是以政府的形式表现出来的卑劣事物。

What a sight! This infinitely proceeding division of society into the most manifold races opposed to one another by petty antipathies, uneasy consciences, and brutal mediocrity, and which, precisely because of their reciprocal ambiguous and distrustful attitude, are all, without exception although with various formalities, treated by theirrulers as conceded existences. And they must recognize and acknowledge as a concession of heaven the very fact that they are mastered, ruled, possessed! And, on the other side, are the rulers themselves, whose greatness is in inverse proportion to their number!

这是一幅什么景象呵！社会无止境地继续分成各色人等，这些心胸狭窄、心地不良、粗鲁平庸之辈处于互相对立的状态，这些人正因为相互采取暧昧的猜疑的态度而被自己的统治者一律——虽然形式有所不同——视为特予恩准的存在物。甚至他们还必须承认和首肯自己之被支配、被统治、被占有全是上天的恩准！而另一方面，是那些统治者本人，他们的身价与他们的人数则成反比！

Criticism dealing with this content is criticism in a hand-to-hand fight, and in such a fight the point is not whether the opponent is a noble, equal, interesting opponent, the point is to strike him. The point is not to let the Germans have a minute for self-deception and resignation. The actual pressure must be made more pressing by adding to it consciousness of pressure, the shame must be made more shameful by publicizing it. Every sphere of German society must be shown as the partie honteuse of German society: these petrified relations must be forced to dance by singing their own tune to them! The people must be taught to be terrified at itself in order to give it courage. This will be fulfilling an imperative need of the German nation, and the needs of the nations are in themselves the ultimate reason for their satisfaction.

涉及这个内容的批判是搏斗式的批判；而在搏斗中，问题不在于敌人是否高尚，是否旗鼓相当，是否有趣，问题在于给敌人以打击。问题在于不让德国人有一时片刻去自欺欺人和俯首听命。应当让受现实压迫的人意识到压迫，从而使现实的压迫更加沉重；应当公开耻辱，从而使耻辱更加耻辱。应当把德国社会的每个领域作为德国社会的羞耻部分［partie honteuse」加以描述，应当对这些僵化了的关系唱一唱它们自己的曲调，迫使它们跳起舞来！为了激起人民的勇气，必须使他们对自己大吃一惊。这样才能实现德国人民的不可抗拒的要求，而各国人民的要求本身则是能使这些要求得到满足的决定性原因。

This struggle against the limited content of the German status quo cannot be without interest even for the modern nations, for the German status quo is the open completion of the ancien régime and the ancien régime is the concealed deficiency of the modern state. The struggle against the German political present is the struggle against the past of the modern nations, and they are still burdened with reminders of that past. It is instructive for them to see the ancien régime, which has been through its tragedy with them, playing its comedy as a German revenant. Tragic indeed was the pre-existing power of the world, and freedom, on the other hand, was a personal notion; in short, as long as it believed and had to believe in its own justification. As long as the ancien régime, as an existing world order, struggled against a world that was only coming into being, there was on its side a historical error, not a personal one. That is why its downfall was tragic.

甚至对现代各国来说，这种反对德国现状的狭隘内容的斗争，也不会是没有意义的，因为德国现状是旧制度［ancien régime］的公开的完成，而旧制度是现代国家的隐蔽的缺陷。对当代德国政治状况作斗争就是对现代各国的过去作斗争，而且对过去的回忆依然困扰着这些国家。这些国家如果看到，在它们那里经历过自己的悲剧的旧制度，现在又作为德国的幽灵在演自己的喜剧，那是很有教益的。当旧制度还是有史以来就存在的世界权力，自由反而是个人突然产生的想法的时候，简言之，当旧制度本身还相信而且也应当相信自己的合理性的时候，它的历史是悲剧性的。当旧制度作为现存的世界制度同新生的世界进行斗争的时候，旧制度犯的是世界历史性的错误，而不是个人的错误。因而旧制度的灭亡也是悲剧性的。

On the other hand, the present German regime, an anachronism, a flagrant contradiction of generally recognized axioms, the nothingness of the ancien régime exhibited to the world, only imagines that it believes in itself and demands that the world should imagine the same thing. If it believed in its own essence, would it try to hide that essence under the semblance of an alien essence and seek refuge in hypocrisy and sophism? The modern ancien régime is rather only the comedian of a world order whose true heroesare dead. History is thorough and goes through many phases when carrying an old form to the grave. The last phases of a world-historical form is its comedy. The gods of Greece, already tragically wounded to death in Aeschylus’s tragedy Prometheus Bound, had to re-die a comic death in Lucian’s Dialogues. Why this course of history? So that humanity should part with its past cheerfully. This cheerful historical destiny is what we vindicate for the political authorities of Germany.

相反，现代德国制度是时代错乱，它公然违反普遍承认的公理，它向全世界展示旧制度毫不中用；它只是想象自己有自信，并且要求世界也这样想象。如果它真的相信自己的本质，难道它还会用一个异己本质的外观来掩盖自己的本质，并且求助于伪善和诡辩吗？现代的旧制度不过是真正主角已经死去的那种世界制度的丑角。历史是认真的，经过许多阶段才把陈旧的形态送进坟墓。世界历史形态的最后一个阶段是它的喜剧。4在埃斯库罗斯的《被锁链锁住的普罗米修斯》中已经悲剧性地因伤致死的希腊诸神，还要在琉善的《对话》中喜剧性地重死一次。历史竟有这样的进程！这是为了人类能够愉快地同自己的过去诀别。我们现在为德国政治力量争取的也正是这样一个愉快的历史结局。

Meanwhile, once modern politico-social reality itself is subjected to criticism, once criticism rises to truly human problems, it finds itself outside the German status quo, or else it would reach out for its object below its object. An example. The relation of industry, of the world of wealth generally, to the political world is one of the major problems of modern times. In what form is this problem beginning to engage the attention of the Germans? In the form of protective duties, of the prohibitive system, of national economy. Germanomania has passed out of man into matter, and thus one morning our cotton barons and iron heroes saw themselves turned into patriots. People are, therefore, beginning in Germany to acknowledge the sovereignty of monopoly on the inside through lending it sovereignty on the outside. People are, therefore, now about to begin, in Germany, what people in France and England are about to end. The old corrupt condition against which these countries are revolting in theory, and which they only bear as one bears chains, is greeted in Germany as the dawn of a beautiful future which still hardly dares to pass from crafty theory to the most ruthless practice. Whereas the problem in France and England is: Political economy, or the rule of society over wealth; in Germany, it is: National economy, or the mastery of private property over nationality. In France and England, then, it is a case of abolishing monopoly that has proceeded to its last consequences; in Germany, it is a case of proceeding to the last consequences of monopoly. There it is a case of solution, here as yet a case of collision. This is an adequate example of the German form of modern problems, an example of how our history, like a clumsy recruit, still has to do extra drill on things that are old and hackneyed in history.

可是，一旦现代的政治社会现实本身受到批判，即批判一旦提高到真正的人的问题，批判就超出了德国现状，不然的话，批判就会认为自己的对象所处的水平低于这个对象的实际水平。下面就是一个例子！工业以至于整个财富领域对政治领域的关系，是现代主要问题之一。这个问题开始是以何种形式引起德国人的关注的呢？以保护关税、贸易限制制度、国民经济学的形式。德意志狂从人转到物质，因此，我们的棉花骑士和钢铁英雄也就在某个早晨一变而成爱国志士了。所以在德国，人们是通过给垄断以对外的统治权，开始承认垄断有对内的统治权的。可见，在法国和英国行将完结的事物，在德国现在才刚刚开始。这些国家在理论上反叛的、而且也只是当作锁链来忍受的陈旧腐朽的制度，在德国却被当作美好未来的初升朝霞而受到欢迎，这个美好的未来好不容易才敢于从狡猾的理论①向最无情的实践过渡。在法国和英国，问题是政治经济学或社会对财富的统治；在德国，问题却是国民经济学或私有财产对国民的统治。因此，在法国和英国是要消灭已经发展到终极的垄断；在德国却要把垄断发展到终极。那里，正涉及解决问题；这里，才涉及到冲突。这个例子充分说明了德国式的现代问题，说明我们的历史就像一个不谙操练的新兵一样，到现在为止还认为自己的任务只是补习操练陈旧的历史。

If, therefore, the whole German development did not exceed the German political development, a German could at the most have the share in the problems-of-the-present that a Russian has. But, when the separate individual is not bound by the limitations of the nation, the nation as a whole is still less liberated by the liberation of one individual. The fact that Greece had a Scythian among its philosophers did not help the Scythians to make a single step towards Greek culture. [An allusion to Anacharsis.]

因此，既然德国的整个发展没有超出德国的政治发展，那么德国人能够参与当代问题的程度顶多也只能像俄国人一样。但是，既然单个人不受国界的限制，那么整个国家就不会因为个人获得解放而获得解放。希腊哲学家中间有一个是西徐亚人5，但西徐亚人并没有因此而向希腊文化迈进一步。

Luckily, we Germans are not Scythians.

我们德国人幸而不是西徐亚人。

As the ancient peoples went through their pre-history in imagination, in mythology, so we Germans have gone through our post-history in thought, in philosophy. We are philosophical contemporaries of the present without being its historical contemporaries. German philosophy is the ideal prolongation of German history. If therefore, instead of the oeuvres incompletes of our real history, we criticize the oeuvres posthumes of our ideal history, philosophy, our criticism is in the midst of the questions of which the present says: that is the question. What, in progressive nations, is a practical break with modern state conditions, is, in Germany, where even those conditions do not yet exist, at first a critical break with the philosophical reflexion of those conditions.

正像古代各民族是在想象中、在神话中经历了自己的史前时期一样，我们德国人在思想中、在哲学中经历了自己的未来的历史。我们是当代的哲学同时代人，而不是当代的历史同时代人。德国的哲学是德国历史在观念上的延续。因此，当我们不去批判我们现实历史的未完成的著作［oeuvres incomplètes］，而来批判我们观念历史的遗著［oeuvres posthumes]——哲学的时候，我们的批判恰恰接触到了当代所谓的问题之所在［that is the question①]的那些问题的中心。在先进国家，是同现代国家制度实际分裂，在甚至不存在这种制度的德国，却首先是同这种制度的哲学反映批判地分裂。

German philosophy of right and state is the only German history which is al pari [“on a level”] with the official modern present. The German nation must therefore join this, its dream-history, to its present conditions and subject to criticism not only these existing conditions, but at the same time their abstract continuation. Its future cannot belimited either to the immediate negation of its real conditions of state and right, or to the immediate implementation of its ideal state and right conditions, for it has the immediate negation of its real conditions in its ideal conditions, and it has almost outlived the immediate implementation of its ideal conditions in the contemplation of neighboring nations. Hence, it is with good reason that the practical political party in Germany demands the negation of philosophy.

德国的法哲学和国家哲学是唯一与正式的当代现实保持在同等水平［al pari]上的德国历史。因此，德国人民必须把自己这种梦想的历史一并归入自己的现存制度，不仅批判这种现存制度，而且同时还要批判这种制度的抽象继续。他们的未来既不能局限于对他们现实的国家和法的制度的直接否定，也不能局限于他们观念上的国家和法的制度的直接实现，因为他们观念上的制度就具有时他们现实的制度的直接否定，而他们观念上的制度的直接实现，他们在观察邻近各国的生活的时候几乎就经历过了。因此，德国的实践政治派要求对哲学的否定是正当的。该派的错误不在于提出了这个要求，而在于停留于这个要求——没有认真实现它，也不可能实现它。该派以为，只要背对着哲学，并且扭过头去对哲学嘟嚷几句陈腐的气话，对哲学的否定就实现了。该派眼界的狭隘性就表现在没有把哲学归人德国的现实范围，或者甚至以为哲学低于德国的实践和为实践服务的理论。你们要求人们必须从现实的生活胚芽出发，可是你们忘记了德国人民现实的生活胚芽一向都只是在他们的脑壳里萌生的。一句话，你们不使哲学成为现实，就不能够消灭哲学。

欢迎关注“新大众哲学”微信公众号：

权威发布马列经典著作编译出版资讯；

为读者提供第一手马列主义经典作家文本；

分享国内外研究马克思主义的最新成果；

投稿邮箱：xindazhongzhexue@sina.com

关注我们，过有意义的人生▼

喜欢此文章请 “点赞” 和 “在看” ↓，分享是一种美德 返回搜狐，查看更多

责任编辑：

平台声明：该文观点仅代表作者本人，搜狐号系信息发布平台，搜狐仅提供信息存储空间服务。