Abstract

This article examines two paradigmatic responses to the question of how humans relate to ultimate reality: Zhuangzi’s “fasting of the mind-sitting in forgetfulness” and Paul’s “justification by faith”. The former represents a path of self-power, while the latter represents a path of other-power. Both employ apophatic language to dismantle human self-reliance, yet they diverge significantly when examined at deeper structural levels. Drawing on Pre-Qin Taoist cultivation theory and Pauline doctrine, this study clarifies their substantive differences across dimensions like anthropology, agency of the will, means of connection, etc. The analysis also addresses certain historical misreadings in Chinese interpretations of Christianity, where conceptual parallels drawn between the two traditions have sometimes obscured their fundamental distinctions. Through a systematic comparison of their inner frameworks, the article reveals how each tradition conceives of human transformation in fundamentally different terms: one through self-cultivation and the other through receptive faith. This comparative inquiry contributes to a more nuanced understanding of two distinct civilizational approaches to the question of human existence, and demonstrates the value of cross-cultural philosophical engagement. This article is a purely academic comparative study of classical texts and does not address contemporary religious practices or policies.