【作者】 郝瑞斌；

【导师】 李士菊；

【作者基本信息】 河北师范大学 ， 马克思主义理论与思想政治教育， 2009， 博士

【摘要】 普列汉诺夫是俄国第一代马克思主义革命家和理论家,俄国社会民主工党的创始人和领袖,第二国际领导人之一。由于后来在政治上堕入机会主义,甚至鼓吹社会沙文主义,所以他又是一个复杂的有争议的人物。从对普列汉诺夫的研究来看,相对于第二国际时期其他马克思主义经典作家来说,还是比较深入的,著述也是较多的。但是关于普列汉诺夫宗教思想方面成果较少,尤其是欠缺全面、系统的探索。作为马克思主义宗教学的基础性研究,本论文是首次系统地对普列汉诺夫的宗教研究及其宗教思想进行研究,因而具有重要的理论意义和现实意义。其理论意义在于,第一,普列汉诺夫宗教思想是马克思主义宗教理论的重要组成部分,对马克思主义宗教理论的发展有一定的贡献,却极少有人专题进行系统的研究,因而对它的研究在一定意义上填补了空白。第二,无论是马克思主义的学科建设还是现实的强烈需要,科学、系统的马克思主义宗教学亟待建立与完善,这就需要对马克思主义经典作家的宗教思想以及马克思主义宗教思想发展史做深入系统的研究。目前,对第二国际与原苏联时期马克思主义宗教思想的研究还比较薄弱、有的甚至还是空白。由于普列汉诺夫在第二国际的地位以及他与列宁的特殊关系,都决定了其宗教思想在马克思主义宗教学研究中占据着一种比较特殊的位置,因此建立马克思主义宗教学需要这样的基础性研究。第三,普列汉诺夫和列宁的宗教研究共同组成了马克思主义宗教理论发展的俄国阶段,而他们的研究又特色鲜明,因此,在深入细致地研究普列汉诺夫宗教思想之后,再进一步与列宁的宗教研究进行比较,可以深入地把握马克思主义宗教理论与时俱进的时代精神和理论品格。其实践意义在于,第一,宗教问题是当今世界的一个热点问题,在我国,宗教问题更有着特殊的复杂性,因此,系统深入地研究普列汉诺夫的宗教思想及其他对宗教的研究,对认识和处理当今世界复杂多变的宗教问题具有一定的指导意义和借鉴意义。第二,普列汉诺夫对宗教的研究集中于他政治上的机会主义时期,所以也引起了不少争议,因此深入细致地研究普列汉诺夫的宗教思想,探讨其宗教研究和政治立场之间的关系,以及其宗教研究所取得的成就、存在的不足的最根本的原因,可以对分析、研究和解决包括宗教问题在内的各种现实社会问题提供世界观方法论高度上的有益借鉴。在研究方法上,论文以历史唯物主义和辩证唯物主义为指导,始终贯彻理论与实践紧密结合的精神。体现在研究中,一是在研究内容上,重点研究普列汉诺夫的宗教思想在理论上是否科学地揭示了宗教的本质、作用及其发生、发展和消亡的规律等,在实践中是否解决了当时社会主义运动中亟待解决的宗教问题,以及注意研究普列汉诺夫研究宗教问题的主观意图以及意图的实现程度等等;二是在研究的目的上,重点关注研究普列汉诺夫在宗教问题研究中的经验和教训以及其宗教思想中有益于现实宗教问题研究和解决的方面。在具体研究过程中,主要使用比较分析方法、个案研究法等社会科学方法。论文共引言、正文和结论三个部分。引言简要介绍了关于普列汉诺夫宗教思想研究的现状以及论文的研究意义和研究方法。结论是对普列汉诺夫宗教研究的总体评价以及对未来宗教研究的瞻望。正文有五章组成。第一章阐述了普列汉诺夫宗教研究的背景。普列汉诺夫的宗教研究正处在世纪之交与时代转变的时期。此时自由竞争的资本主义已经走向垄断的帝国主义,时代主题由和平转变为战争与革命。反映在宗教问题上,在西欧,由于基督教会逐渐完成了资本主义化,宗教和资产阶级开始互相勾结、互相利用,共同破坏社会主义运动。而普列汉诺夫的祖国——俄国,仍然是一个政教合一、全民信教、宗教势力根深蒂固的国家。其国教——东正教会作为国家机器的一个组成部分,自觉地充当着沙皇统治的工具。马克思恩格斯创立的历史唯物主义宗教观为无产阶级锻造了认识宗教的思想武器。但是,马克思恩格斯的宗教思想是研究宗教问题的指导性原则,并不是包治百病的灵丹妙药。当时代急剧变革,社会主义革命提到历史日程时,就要求从理论和实践两个方面来完善和发展马克思恩格斯的宗教思想。第二章简要介绍了普列汉诺夫宗教研究的基本情况。普列汉诺夫的宗教思想经历了从有神论到启蒙无神论、再到科学无神论的发展过程。普列汉诺夫对宗教问题的研究是在其科学无神论时期开始的,可以分为初步论述、集中研究和余论三个阶段。第二个阶段(1905—1911)在形式上贯穿了他政治上的马克思主义时期(1883—1903)、孟什维主义时期(1903—1914)和社会沙文主义时期(1914—1918),并主要集中于其孟什维主义时期。但是其著作的性质仍然是马克思主义的。普列汉诺夫的宗教研究,在主观意图上,力图补充和完善马克思主义的思想体系,力图服务于工人运动实践的需要;在理论方法上,始终贯彻着从现实生活出发解释宗教现象的唯物主义方法论原则,贯穿着辩证的思维方法尤其是矛盾发展规律分析的原则。第三章阐述了普列汉诺夫对宗教基本规律的论述。主要是宗教的定义、宗教的演变和宗教的社会作用三个方面。普列汉诺夫非常重视宗教定义的研究。他结合宗教观念的演化,以宗教观念是否和道德相结合给宗教一词下了定义;同时还将宗教定义为观念、情绪和活动的相当严整的体系。他还进一步指出,万物有灵论观念是宗教的基础,它的发展决定于经济的进化。关于宗教的演变,普列汉诺夫认为万物有灵论是宗教思想发展的最初阶段,但是,单纯的万物有灵论观念还不是宗教。宗教的主要特征是对神或诸神的信仰,相信有超自然实体的存在和信仰它是两回事。图腾崇拜才是宗教的最初形式。具体到宗教的发展,普列汉诺夫以“权威”社会组织的产生为标志将宗教的发展划分为两个发展阶段。在宗教的消亡问题上,普列汉诺夫认为迫使宗教不断缩小影响和控制范围以至最后完全消亡的因素主要可以归结为生产力的增强、社会关系的调整和改变、认识领域的扩大,而阻碍宗教消亡的因素主要有阶级方面、心理方面和认识方面等等的因素。关于宗教的社会作用,在原始社会里,宗教是原始人试图解释自然界现象的尝试,在这个阶段上,它执行着哲学、神学、科学的职能;在一定意义上,原始宗教还促进了生产力和生产关系的发展;并对艺术、哲学等其他的意识形态产生了巨大影响。在阶级社会,宗教主要是剥削阶级的统治工具,在精神上使人们陷于空虚。但是在一定的条件下,它也可以为代表先进生产力的和受压迫的阶级所用来争取自己的权利,并促进文化知识的传播和科学的发展。第四章阐述了普列汉诺夫宗教研究中独具特色的部分。主要是他对社会心理与宗教、宗教与诸意识形态以及宗教批判学说史的研究。普列汉诺夫认为,宗教心理(宗教情感)是社会心理的一个组成部分,社会心理是思想体系反映社会经济关系与政治制度的中间环节。宗教作为思想体系之一起源于社会心理(宗教情感),社会经济关系又决定着社会心理(宗教情感)。而从社会心理学角度考察“寻神论”、“造神论”产生的根源,就是因为革命失败后“知识分子”的烦恼;从个人心理分析托尔斯泰“寻找上帝”的原因,则是他心理上的空虚。关于宗教与诸意识形态的关系,普列汉诺夫认为,政治观点或政治态度对宗教具有决定性的影响;宗教则是政治保守派的天然同盟军和维护对象。宗教和道德在本质上是截然不同的:宗教的基础是万物有灵论,道德的基础是利益;二者在历史上也不是必然地结合在一起的。原始宗教深刻地影响着原始艺术,甚或说对原始艺术的起源有重要的作用;但是也不能夸大这种作用,二者归根结底都植根于原始民族的生产力状况。宗教与唯心主义都起源于原始人的万物有灵主义,二元论和不可知论也和它有着密切的血缘关系;唯物主义则认为自然界就是原始狩猎部落所说的客观灵魂、精灵活动等现象的基础。宗教同科学截然相反,科学把自然界看成是一连串互相依赖的现象,宗教则把自然界看成是意志的表现。具有万物有灵论性质的唯心主义过去战胜了科学的唯物主义原因在于:自然科学与社会科学发展的不均衡;所谓的“两重真理论”对宗教的拯救;现存的制度和反动的阶级妨碍知识的传播,妨碍宗教的批判。普列汉诺夫还对宗教与诸意识形态的关系做了规律性探讨,认为,第一,在社会经济发展的不同阶段上,任何一种意识形态(包括宗教)都要在不同的程度上受到其他各种意识形态的影响。表现在每个特定时代的思想体系永远是和前一时代的思想体系有密切的联系;每一个一定的思想体系在不同的社会发展阶段中以极不相等的程度受其他思想体系的影响。第二,要以人类生存的物质条件,以经济史来说明观念(包括宗教)的历史。关于宗教批判学说史,普列汉诺夫比较集中地研究了神学的历史观、法国唯物主义的宗教观以及近代德国宗教批判学说史。普列汉诺夫认为,虽然圣奥古斯丁和博胥埃的历史观是神学的历史观,但是在他们的学说内部唯物主义的因素在发展着;十八世纪的法国启蒙思想家伏尔泰和赫尔巴赫很好地发展了这个唯物主义因素,其实践的后果是巨大的,但是由于他们走不出“意见”和“环境”的二律背反,因而丝毫没有促进对宗教的科学研究。宗教哲学在黑格尔辩证方法的有益影响下做出了巨大进步,其后,它经过鲍威尔和施特劳斯“自我意识”和“无意识”之间的僵硬的对立以及费尔巴哈抽象的人本主义的宗教思想的中介,最终由马克思恩格斯发展为“非宗教”的历史唯物主义宗教观。第五章是普列汉诺夫和其他经典马克思主义作家宗教思想的比较性研究。在研究的基本内容上,拉法格主要研究了宗教观念和宗教仪式以及资产阶级和无产阶级的宗教意识,列宁则深刻分析了宗教的本质、宗教的社会根源尤其是阶级根源和认识论根源以及宗教的社会作用,并根据俄国革命的实际,科学制定了工人阶级政党对待宗教的基本原则。陈独秀则探讨了宗教的本质、根源和发展趋势,着重批判了宗教的负面作用,提出“以科学代宗教”。从论述的特点看,拉法格基于当时法国阶级斗争的现实,深刻地揭示了宗教和教会在阶级斗争中所起的反动作用,并力图揭示宗教得以产生的物质原因以从理论上清除宗教的影响。列宁立足于解决俄国革命中实际的宗教问题,所以他的宗教研究同社会主义实践联系紧密,特别强调阶级、阶级斗争和阶级分析的方法。陈独秀对宗教问题的分析和批判也是紧密地与时代发展相联系,贯穿着实际研究的精神和实际活动的精神。比较他们之间的研究,相对而言,拉法格比普列汉诺夫更具有时代意识,研究成果也更成体系。从研究的理论层面看,普列汉诺夫的宗教研究主要还是从属于唯物史观的基本原理性质的研究,拉法格的宗教研究尤其是他的比较神话学研究则从宏观分析深入到了微观分析。与列宁相比较,普列汉诺夫侧重宗教理论,列宁侧重宗教政策。普列汉诺夫的宗教研究对马克思恩格斯的宗教思想有所发展、有所创新,但是在总体上没有取得突破性的进展;列宁则在继承、丰富马克思恩格斯宗教思想的同时将其推向了新的发展阶段。与陈独秀比较,二者大力批判宗教的时期,正是当时社会陷入精神危机,宗教极度泛滥的时期,他们都敏锐地意识到问题的严重性,从而开始了他们的宗教批判。不同在于陈独秀论述问题多从本国实际出发,针对时弊,然而理论深度不够,往往停留于肤浅的表层分析,普列汉诺夫则从哲学根本问题着手论述宗教问题,具有较浓的理论色彩,但对本国实际有所忽视。第六章是对普列汉诺夫宗教思想的评析。由于理论上和实践斗争中的需要,普列汉诺夫对宗教问题作了深入地研究和探讨,虽然不能说他的一切观点都是马克思主义的定论,但是他的论述,不但捍卫了马克思主义的基本观点,在一定程度上对马克思恩格斯的某些基本原理作了阐发和具体化,并且开辟了研究的新领域,从而使其更加丰富、具体、严整。分析普列汉诺夫宗教研究取得较高成就的原因,在于他是一位坚持辩证唯物主义和历史唯物主义立场的渊博的思想家,在于他对宗教问题的阐发与论证既是出于深化、扩展唯物史观的需要、更是出于社会实践迫切的需要,在于他研究角度的客观和全面以及注意吸取资产阶级理论家理论中的合理成分。普列汉诺夫宗教思想的局限,主要表现在忽视宗教政策的研究,其主要原因是他远离了俄国革命斗争的实践。另外,在理论研究中,有些问题阐述的模糊不清。这些局限同他的贡献相比,是比较次要的问题。同时,更不能因为他政治上的错误而抹煞他宗教理论上的贡献,或者把他的宗教理论上的局限归于机会主义的影响。深究普列汉诺夫宗教研究方面的不足,其根源在于普列汉诺夫远离了人民群众、远离了火热的社会实践,这既是他宗教研究上存在不足的根本原因,也是他政治上失足的根本原因。应该说,共同的根源是大于因果关系的。它雄辩地说明只有真诚地信仰马克思主义、始终不渝地坚持马克思主义,才能在一些复杂的问题上站稳立场、辨清正误,进而有所作为;只有结合现实实际发展马克思主义,才能真正做到坚持马克思主义。更多还原

【Abstract】 Plekhanov, the leader and founder of Russian Social--Democratic Workers’Party,was one of The Second Internation leaders and one of the first Marxism revolutionists and ideologues. But later he became a person known with denial for his falling into opportunism and preaching up chauvinism.Compared with the other Marxians, Plekhanov was studied more deeply and the writings about him are more. However, about his religious thought, the achievements are fewer; especially the researchs are not comprehensive or systemic enough. As a basic study on Marxism religion, Plekhanov’s religious study with his regious thought is first researched by the numbers in this paper, which has a big significance in theory and reality. Its significance in theory as follows. Firstly, as an important part of the Marxism religious theory, Plekhanov’s religious thought made some contribution to the development of the Marxism. However very few people have studied it as a special subject by the numbers except for this paper. Secondly, nowadays scientific and systemic Marxism Religionics are expected to be set up and improved not only for the subject’s setting up but also for the reality’s wanting. So it is necessary to deeply study Marxism sutra writers’religious thought and Marxism religion’s history. At present, the study on the second internation and Marxism religious thought in USSR is feeble, even empty, in somewhere. And setting up a subject for the Marxism religion needs this kind of basic study for Plekhanov’position in the Second Internation and the special relationship with Lenin who made his religious thought not ignored in the Marxism religious study. Thirdly, both Plekhanov’s and Lenin’s studies on religion made Marxism religious theory’s Russian phase into being, furthermore, their studies were outstanding. Therefore, after a deeper study of Plekhanov’s regious thought, we can grasp the spirit of Marxism religious theory, which can advance with the times. About its practice significance, we divide it into two parts. On one hand, the religious problems are top topics in the world. In china, the religious problems are more comprexhensive. So studying Plekhanov’s religious thought and his opinions on other religions by the numbers is meaningful and helpful for understanding and dealing with religious problems changing constantly in the world. On the other hand, there are many different opinions on Plekhanov for his study on religion mainly took place in his opportunism period. So through studying deeply into Plekhanov’s religious thought, exploring the relation between his religious study and political viewpoints, and his achievement, deficiency, we can support some helpful reference with the global view and methodology to analyzing, studying and settling kinds of social problems.For the study approach, the thesis uses the historical materialism and dialectical materialism as the guidance, and carries through the spirit of combining theories and practice. In the studying, it mainly study whether Plekhanov’s religious thought revealed the religious intrinsic, function and regulation of its bearing, development and perishing in the theories and whether resolved the religious problems in socialism movement in practicing. Secondly, on the purpose, it pays more attention to the experience and lessons in studying and some aspects which are good for studying and solving real—life religious problems in religious thought. In the actual studying, it mainly uses comparing-- and --analyzing approach and other social scientific approaches.The thesis consists of introduction, text and conclusion briefly. The introduction introduces the present situation of Plekhanov religious thought, the paper’s significance and study approach. The conclusion estimates Plekhanov’s religious study generally and talks about something about the religious study in the future.The text is made up of five chapters. The first chapter tells of the background of Plekhanov’s regious study. At that time, Plekhanov’s religious study did be at the cross of two centuries when one time took the place of another time. When Capitalism had developed into Imperialism, the peace had fallen into war and revolution. On the religious problems, in Western Europe, Zion had accomplished itself into capitalist. Besides the religion and the bourgeoisie used each other and ruined socialism movements together. But Russia, Plekhanov’s motherland was still an intact country whose politics power and religion didn’t part, all people believed in religion, and the religious force was stable. As a part of country machine Orthodox Church, the national religion of Russia, was being Tsar regnant tool. Marx and Engels’materialism religious view gave proletariate a thought weapon to realize the religions. Although Marx and Engels’religious thought is an instructional principle, it can’t solve all the religious problems. When the time changes sharply, the socialism revolution becomes necessary, Marx and Engels’religious thought is needed improving and developing. The second one generalizes about Plekhanov’s religious research. Plekhanov’s religious thought experienced from theism, athetheism to scientific athetheism. Plekhanov’religious study began in scientific atheism period. It can be divided into three stages. The second phase (1903—1914) went through his Marxism period on politics, and mainly fosused on his Mensheviks period and Social chauvinism period. But his writing’s nature still belonged to Marxism. Plekhanov’s religious study tried to improve Marxism thought system in his subjective purpose, tried to serve for the workers’movements. The materialistic mathodology principle and dialectic idea means especially his contrary development analysis principle was being from beginning to end in his writing’s.The third chapter expounds the basic explanation of Plekhanov’s religious thought, which includes religious definition, evolution, and religious social function. He paid much attention to studying the religious definition. He made a definition for religion with the religion evolution view___whether considering both religious idea and moral at the same time. His definited religion as a whole system of conception, emotion and activities. Besides he stated that the basis of religion was animatism whose development depended on the economic development. About the religion’evolution, he believed religious thought’s original phase was animatism, but the pure animatism isn’t a kind of religion. The main feature of religion is that the people believe in the gods. Believing preternatural entity’s existing is different from believing in it. Religious initial form is totem adoration. As for the religious concrete development, Plekhanov divided religious development history into two phases according to the sign that‘authority’social orgnazation come into being. About religion’s vanishing, Plekhanov believed that it owed to the productivity’boosting up, the social relationship’s change and the cognition field’s expanding. About the factors of preventing religion from vanishing, he believed the main factors were the classical, mental, cognition and so on. As for the religion’s social functions, the premitives attempted to use it to explain the natural phynomenon. At this phase, its functions were philosophy, theology and science. Besides, the religion also promoted productivity and the relation of production. Furthermore, it had immense influence on art; phylosophy etc.In the class society, religion’s main function was a tool of exploiting class’ruling the country and made the people inane. But in some certain conditions, it could help the class who represented advanced productivity and were oppressed win their own right. At the same time, it could promote the culture’s spreading and the science’s development.Chapter Four tells of the most distinguishing features in Plekhanov’s religious study. It mainly focuses on his study of social psychology and religion, ideologies and religion and religious criticism history. Plekhanov thought religious psychology was a part of the social psychology which was a middle link of ideology reflecting social economical relationship and political system. As one of ideological systems, its origin was social psychology, while the social psychology depended on social economic relationship. From the social psychology, we found the new religion and the origin and vicissitude of the religion came from intellects’trouble after revolution failure. Analyzing Tolstoy’s behavior of searching after God from personal mentality resulted from his inane. About the relationship of religion and ideologies, he believed political view or political attitude could definitively influence religion. While, religion was a natural colleague of the conservative in politics. Religion and morality were different in nature because religion’s foundation was Animatism but morality’s was benefit. In history, it was not necessary either that they two combined into one. The primary religion influenced on the primary art deeply, even it can be said that the primary religion made a good influence on the primary art’birth. Of course, this effect couldn’t be magnified for they two all rooted in primary communes’productivity. At the same time, both religion and mentalism derive from the primitive’s Animatism. Dualism and Agnosticism had a close kin. From materialism, the nature was the foundation of objective anima, demon activities and so on in the primitive hunting tribes. Religion and science were poles apart. From science, all the things depend on each other, however, from religion; the nature is only a performence of will. Plekhanov also studied the relationship between religion and ideologies. Firstly, in the diffenent phases in social economical development, any ideology must be influenced by other ideologies. The ideological system in certain times had a close relation with the former. Every certain ideology system was influenced differently very much in different times by others. Secondly, the conception history religion included] should be introduced by economic history. About religion criticism history, Plekhanov paid much attention to studying theology’s historical concepts, materialism religious concepts in France and religion criticism history in German in modern times. He thought that although Augustine’s and Bossuet’s historical concepts belonged to theology, the factors of the materialism were growing in their doctrine. In 18th century, the French Voltaire and Feuerbach made a good progress on them, whose practical results were huge. But because of their failing to tell from opinion and environment, religious research wasn’t improved a bit. Finally with the influence of the dialectic of Hegel religious philosophy made a vast concession. Then after it experienced the still opposition of Powell’s and Strauss’s‘self-consciousness’and‘unconsciousness’, and came through the go-between of Feuerbach’s humanism religious ideology, it was improved to historical materialism religious ideology by Marx and Engels.The fifth chapter mainly focuses on the comparative research of religious idea of Plekhanov and Marxism researcher. On the basic content, Lafargue studied religious concept, religious ceremony and the bourgeoisie’s and Proletariat’s religious consciousness. And Lenin deeply analysized religious nature, religious social foundation especially its class’and epistemology’s foundation and the religious social function. Lenin also made the scientific basic principles how the working class treated religion according to the Russian actual situation. Chen Duxiu probed into religious nature, origin and development trend, and criticized the religious disadvantage, then put forward‘science takes the place of religion’. From the writing and statement base on the fighting between classes in France, Lafargue discovered religion and church’s retroactive function. And in order to get rid of religious influence from theory, he tried his best to reveal religion’s coming out and growing condition. What Lenin did was to work out and solved the religious problems in Russian revolution, so his religious study was close to socialism practice, and attached importance to class, class fighting, and the methods of analyzing class. Chen Duxiu’s analyzing and criticizing religion refered to the times developing too. The spirit of studying practicality and working practicality went through the whole process. In comparison with their studies, relatively Lafargue’s has more modern conscious and the research of the analysis into system than Plekhanov’s. Viewing from the theoretical, Plekhanov’s study of the religious mainly belongs to the basic characteristic of the historical materialism, while Lafargue study of the religious concern from the macro -analysis into the micro -analysis. Comparing with Lenin’s, Plekhanov focus on the religious theory, Based on the religious ideas of Marx and Engels,Plekhanov’s study of religious makes more developments and innovations。However, he doesn’t have a breakthrough progress on the whole. As well as inheriting and inriching the religious ideas of Marx and Engels, Lenin lead it to the new stage of the development. Relate to Chen Duxiu, Lenin and Plekhanov criticize the period of the religious strongly when the society slumped into the spiritual crisis and the religious flooding extremely, they become aware of the problems seriously, so they begin with the criticism. Dissimilaritily, Chen Duxiu discuss the problems from the practicality and aim at the disadvantage of the period, nevertheless, due to the deficient of the theretical, he frequently stay on the superficial analysis. But Plekhanov commences discussing it from the philosophy rootage problems which possess strong theoretical color, yet ignoring the domestic fact.In Chapter Six, Plekhanov’s religious thought is estimated and analyzed. For the needs of the theory and practical fighting, Plekhanov studied and treated the religious problems in detail. Although not all of his view was the last word of Marxism, his discussion not only guarded Marxism’s basic view and expounded Marx and Engles’some basic theory but also widened new field and made it richer, more concrete and better in neat formation. Why studying Plekhanov’highly achievement in religious study, for he was an ideologist insisting dialectic materialism and historical materials. He expounded and proved religion. It was necessary to widen materialism histerical concept, and more necessary to social practice, furthermore he studied comprehensively and absorbed the good factors from bourgeoisie theories. However, there were some blemishes in Plekhanov’s religious thought. It missed studying religious policy for he was far away from the practice of Russian revolution. Additionally, some parts weren’t expounded clearly enough in theory studying. Nevertheless, these blemishes are minor to his contribution. At the same time, his contribution in religious theory shouldn’t be deleted for his mistakes in politics, or the limits in religious theory are ascribed to the influence of opportunism. The blemishes came from his alienation from people and the heat social practice, which are key reasons in his religious studying and mistakes in politics. What Plekhanov did in religious studying shows that believing in Marxism sincerely and adhering to Marxism unswervingly is the unique way to tell trueness from errors and to accomplish it.更多还原