The Parable of Wise and Foolish Builders in Yishen Lun and Rabbinic Literature

Abstract

The paper undertakes a comparative analysis of the parable of the Wise and Foolish Builders as presented in three distinct sources: the seventh-century Dunhuang manuscript Yishen Lun (Discourse on God), the sixth-century rabbinic text Avot D’Rabbi Nathan, and the Gospels (Matthew and Luke) of the Christian Bible. It explores the imagery used, piety taught, and worldviews conveyed in these renditions, concluding that the version in Yishen Lun shares a closer resemblance with the one in rabbinic literature than with the Gospels. This discovery, in conjunction with previously published findings by the author, challenges the conventional classification of Yishen Lun as an “Aluoben document” (or a Jingjiao document, for that matter), underscoring the need for further research and inquiry.

1. Introduction

In his 1918 article titled “Keikyo Kyokten Isshinron Kaisetsu 景敎經典一神論解說 (An Explication of the Jingjiao Document Yishen Lun)” (Haneda 1918), Toru Haneda introduced the Dunhuang manuscript Yishen Lun (Discourse on God1) and identified it as a Christian document because of the “Sermon on the Mount” (a partial paraphrase) found in it. In subsequent papers from 1923 and 1931, Haneda (1923, 1931) dated the document to the year 641 CE2 and published its text.3

Yishen Lun (YSL) can be divided into two parts:4 Part I (lines 1–205) is a doctrinal treatise covering topics such as God, All Things, humanity, piety, two worlds (citianxia-bitianxia, 此天下/彼天下 or this world and that world), demons and evil. Part II (lines 208–404) provides an account of the teachings, trial, crucifixion, and resurrection of Jesus, along with a brief history from Pentecost to the time of the author. It calls on Christians to adhere to Christ’s words and non-Christians to embrace the faith. The “Sermon on the Mount”, as identified by Haneda, is found in the opening lines (208–249) of Part II and commences with the proclamation “Shizun yue 世尊曰 (The Lord5 says)”.

In the Gospels, the Sermon on the Mount, in either the Matthean or Lukan form, concludes with “The Wise and Foolish Builders” parable (Builders/Gospels), which exhorts people to act on Jesus’ teachings rather than merely hearing them. This parable is an essential component of the Sermon on the Mount, serving as a powerful conclusion. As George Strecker puts it, “it places an impressive capstone on the structure of the Sermon”. (Strecker 1988, p. 169). Given its importance, it is odd that in YSL, the parable does not appear at the end of its “Sermon on the Mount” (208–249), but at the end of a different passage, namely, the citianxia-bitianxia discourse (108–159) in Part I. This section is not attributed to Shizun and imparts a distinct lesson. Meanwhile, there exists another version of the “Wise and Foolish Builders” parable in Jewish rabbinic literature, specifically in the sixth-century midrashic work Avot D’Rabbi Nathan (The Fathers According to Rabbi Nathan), which is an extended commentary and amplification on the third-century mishnaic tractate Pirkei Avot (Chapters of the Fathers). What does this version (Builders/Rabbinic) convey and teach, and how does it compare with the version in the citianxia-bitianxia passage of YSL (Builders/YSL)? Between Builders/Gospels and Builders/Rabbinic, with which one does Builders/YSL share a closer resemblance? These are the central questions addressed in this paper. In concluding his 2009 paper comparing the Gospel and rabbinic versions of the parable, Eric Ottenheijm remarks: “Often parallels have been considered problematic with regard to ‘who influenced whom’. Our task was, however, to compare the discourses the parallels serve. From this perspective, some conclusions may be drawn.” (Ottenheijm 2009, pp. 60–61). We share a similar focus in this paper.

Three common elements surface when scrutinizing the three versions of the parable in conjunction with their respective contextual discourses: the imagery of the parable, the two forms of piety, and a worldview consisting of two worlds. These three aspects provide the groundwork for our study and comparison, guiding the structure of the overview (Section 2, Section 3 and Section 4), the comparative analysis of the three versions (Section 5), and some concluding remarks (Section 6).

A couple of preliminary considerations warrant attention regarding the scope of this study. As mentioned, the objective of this paper is to assess whether Builders/YSL aligns more closely with Builders/Gospels or Builders/Rabbinic, and, as such, it does not directly involve a comparison between the latter two. We note only that the relationship between the Gospel and rabbinic versions of the parable has long been studied by scholars (e.g., Snodgrass 2008; Ottenheijm 2009; Jones 2012, etc.). On the question of whether Jesus borrowed the parable from the rabbis or vice versa, a widely shared view is that the rabbinic version, dating to about 500 CE and attributed to a second-century rabbi, might be based on earlier tradition, but it is challenging to argue for direct borrowing in either direction. The two versions are in fact not very similar, and their logic is straightforward enough that they might have emerged independently (Snodgrass 2008, p. 334).

Second, considering the presence of Buddhist vocabulary and phraseology in YSL,6 one might wonder if Builders/YSL could have a Buddhist origin. However, Jingjiao scholars have cautioned against interpreting YSL (or other “Jingjiao texts” for that matter) with a Buddhist bias because of the language. Chen Huayu conjectures that the Buddhist language was there because the Christians in Tang China had relied on local literati to prepare their texts, and the only religious language these hired hands knew was that of the Buddhist or Taoist tradition (Chen 2015, p. 52). Huang Xianian contends that, while certain Buddhist elements may be present in Tang Christian texts (“Jingjiao documents”), the core Christian doctrines and perspectives within these texts remain intact. Therefore, any suggestions of potential Buddhist influences should be approached with careful consideration (Huang 2000, p. 90). More pertinent to this study is that while a house-and-foundation metaphor can also be found in Buddhist texts, a complete parable contrasting the success and failure of two different building methods tested by violent natural events would likely be rare, if not entirely absent, in Buddhist texts. Hence, a comparison with a Buddhist source is not within the scope of this paper.

2. The Parable in the Citianxia-Bitianxia Discourse of YSL

The following discussion involves an exegesis of YSL, specifically centered on the citianxia-bitianxia section. It is important to note from the outset that a consensus regarding the interpretation of YSL (and “Jingjiao documents” in general) is often lacking, particularly concerning the more difficult and opaque segments. The challenges of interpreting YSL have long been acknowledged by scholars. Haneda observed, “However, this translation [YSL] seems to be a kind of colloquial expression from the Tang Dynasty, making it very difficult to understand” (Haneda 1918, p. 236). Jiang Wenhan described the text as strange and difficult to understand (Jiang 1982, p. 59), while Nicolini-Zani characterized it as “difficult”, “obscure”, and “problematic” (Nicolini-Zani 2022, pp. 151, 194, 234, 252, etc.). In the view of this author, the optimal approach involves gaining a thorough familiarity with the text through repeated readings and structural analysis, consulting relevant sources such as other Dunhuang and Turfan texts,7 and referencing interpretations provided by fellow scholars. Within this framework, the author aims to present his own interpretations in the subsequent discussion, with the rationale for these interpretations provided in the footnotes, wherever possible.

Generally speaking, the citianxia-bitianxia discourse (108–159) in Part I discusses a rewarding system of human existence in two worlds. It says that just as our body in citianxia (this world) is prepared during our time in the mother’s womb, our soul’s state of being in bitianxia (the world-to-come) is determined by our deeds in citianxia. The text underlines the significance of performing good works in citianxia, drawing distinctions between a form of piety without good works (i.e., worship, study and rules observance only), and another with good works of almsgiving. This ethical teaching, based on a profound theory of the soul and worldview (91–107), finds expression through the parable in lines 146–156.

2.1. Imagery

146 唯事一神天尊，8 礼拜一神，一取一神進止9。不

You are to love and serve the only one God, the Lord. Worship God and adhere solely to God’s commands.

147 是10此意知功德，不是餘處功德。11 此處功德，

[However,] this is the good works of the mind, not all the good works. The good works referred to here

148 不是功德處。12 喻如人作舍，預前作基腳，先須

does not encapsulate the fundamental nature of good works. For example, someone builds a house by first laying down a foundation, making it

149 牢固安置。13若基腳不牢固，舍即不成。喻如欲

firm and secure. If the foundation is not solid, the house is not complete. This is to say that

150 作功德，先脩行，具戒俻足，14 亦須知一神安置。

when we do good works, we self-cultivate, observe all the rules, and be cognizant of the providence of God.

151 人皆須礼拜，須領一神恩，然後更別作15功德。

[Indeed,] everyone should worship God and receive His grace, but should do all the other good works as well.

152 此是言語讚歎功德，亦不是餘功德。亦須知，喻

[Otherwise,] this is good works of verbal praise and adoration, not the rest of all good works. One should know, with respect to

153 如說言，須作好善意，智裏天尊。何誰別在功

speech, one ought to be good-intentioned, with the mind on the Lord. If one is not

154 德處不勤心時，如似人無意智，欲作舍，基腳

engaged in good works diligently, he or she would be like a foolish person building a house with a foundation

155 不著地，被風懸吹16將去。如舍腳牢，風亦不能懸

not properly set in the ground, causing the house to be blown away by the swirling wind. If the foundation is firmly built, the wind cannot

156 吹得。…

blow it away …

There are five movements in these lines. First (146–148a), it exhorts people to love, worship, and obey the only one God, while also underscoring that this alone does not encompass all good works, nor does it address the central meaning of good works. Second (148b–149), it introduces the parable, saying that when constructing a house, laying a solid foundation is crucial, as the project would otherwise fail. Third (150–153a), it admonishes those who are pious only in the sense that they sing and praise God, study the scriptures and observe the rules, cautioning that they may not fully understand the true will of God, as they neglect other good works. Fourth (153b–155a), it compares those who ignore doing the other good works to a foolish person building a house without laying a solid foundation, leading to the house being easily blown away by the wind. Fifth (155b–156a), it reassures that if the foundation is solid, the house will remain secure.

2.2. Two Forms of Piety

The first form of piety is depicted in line 146, and it involves loving, worshipping, and obeying the only one God. The subsequent lines emphasize that while this piety is correct and important, if it is not supplemented by other good works, it is not secure at the foundation and it will fail. A complete sense of piety is outlined in lines 130–140:

130b–131 一切功德，須此處作，不是彼處作。

For all the good works, they should be done here, not over there.

131–132 莫跪拜鬼。此處作功德，不是彼處。

Do not worship the ghosts. Do the good works here, not over there.

132–133 一神處分17莫違。願此處得作，彼處不得作。

Do not go against the order (will) of God. It is wished that it (the will of God) be undertaken here, for it cannot be over there.

133–134 喻如作功德，先須此處作，不是彼處。

In terms of doing good works, they should be done here beforehand, not over there.

134–135 布施與他物功德，此處施得，彼處雖施亦不得。

For the good works of giving alms, they can be accomplished here, not over there even if one tries.

135–136 發心18須寬大，不得窄小，即得作寬，此處得作，彼處作不得。

The resolve should be inclusive in perspective, should not be narrow, so that [the good works] can benefit widely. This can be done here, not over there.

136–138 以此思量，毒心、惡意、怨酬、增[憎]嫉物，須除却，此處除可得，彼處除不可得。

With this in mind, any malice, venom, revenge and jealousy should be eliminated. They can be eliminated here, not over there.

138–139 身心淨潔，恭敬礼拜，不犯戒行，此處作得，彼處作不得。

Keep the body and mind pure and clean. Worship in reverence and commit no transgressions. These can be done here, not over there.

139–140a 至心礼拜天尊，一切罪業皆得除免。此處礼得，彼處礼不得。

Worship the Lord in utmost sincerity, so that all your sins will be forgiven. It is possible to worship here, but not over there.

In this description, the wholistic piety, on the negating side, includes rejecting the worship of demons and purging one’s heart of malice, venom, revenge, or jealousy towards others, and on the confirming side, loving, serving, and worshipping the only one God (146: 唯事一神天尊，恭敬礼拜，至心礼拜), adhering solely to His commands, maintaining cleanliness in mind and body, and providing material assistance to those in need.

This passage possesses a rhythmic and poetic quality, characterized by the refrain “doing it here, not over there” placed at the end of each sentence, juxtaposing the terms “here” (cichu 此處) and “there” (bichu 彼處) repeatedly. These terms are abbreviations of citianxia and bitianxia, used perhaps for metrical considerations. The entire passage appears to be deliberately crafted for easier recitation and memorization, both for individuals and the community. This special treatment indicates the passage’s central significance within this faith community.

2.3. Two Worlds

Builders/YSL, therefore, is a metaphor built on a worldview consisting of two worlds: citianxia and bitianxia. What happens in citianxia affects bitianxia. Thus:

121b–122 万物彼天下須，[此]天下須在前。此間須作，分明宣說。

All Things is required in bitianxia. [Ci]tianxia therefore should come first. What needs to be done here has now been clearly manifested.

129b–130 如彼天下須者，此間合作19，此間若不合作，至彼處亦不能作。

For what are mandatory in bitianxia, it is appropriate to have them done here. If they are not suitable to be done here, they are not over there either.

For this reason, one’s condition in bitianxia is contingent upon his or her behavior and life choices in citianxia. While the changes may only manifest in the future, they are determined by what has transpired beforehand (116: 更在後，亦如在先作). The premise is that genuine good deeds in this life will lead to rewards in the next (119–120: 為如此生能脩善種，果報彼天下). The merits of these good deeds are subject to God’s judgment (156: 如功德無天尊證，即不成就), and as for what they are, the verses in 130–140 have provided a sketch.

Although bitianxia is experienced by a person after citianxia, it does not imply that it comes into existence only after the conclusion of citianxia. The two worlds are concurrent, and one transitions to bitianxia upon departing from citianxia. This can be observed from 140–141, which states that a person proceeds to bitianxia after leaving citianxia, and from 142–144, which suggests that God (or the Power of God) proceeds to bitianxia after having established citianxia.

140–141 若有此天下去人，於此處種果報得具足。

For people who have gone (there) from citianxia, they will receive all the rewards for what they have sown here.

142–144 一神自聖化神自聖化，20神力作，在先安置天下，然後彼天下去。

God is self-sanctified. The power of God has acted, and having provided for citianxia, He proceeds to bitianxia.

The concept of bitianxia in YSL is, therefore, more of a cosmological worldview than an eschatological one, and this is evident in the frequent juxtaposition of the paired term citianxia and bitianxia (or their variants).

3. The Parable in Avot D’Rabbi Nathan of Rabbinic Literature

The original mishnaic tractate Pirkei Avot delivered its teachings through aphorisms attributed to sages around 250 CE. Later, possibly around 500 CE, Avot D’Rabbi Nathan expanded on this tractate by adding numerous narratives, presenting a significant number of stories and parables, (Neusner 1997, p. xli) and one of these elaborations and additions is the parable of the two builders, attributed to Elisha b. Abuyah, a second-century rabbi. The parable is found in Paras A–D, Section I, Chapter XXIV of Neusner’s edition of Avot D’Rabbi Nathan:

3.1. Imagery

A. Elisha b. Abuyah says, “One who has good deeds to his credit and has studied the Torah a great deal—to what is he to be likened?

B. “To someone who builds first with stones and then with bricks. Even though a great flood of water comes and washes against the foundations, the water does not blot them out of their place.

C. “One who has no good deeds to his credit but has studied the Torah—to what is he to be likened?

D. “To someone who builds first with bricks and then with stones. Even if only a little water comes and washes against the foundations, it forthwith overturns them.”

(Neusner 1997, p. 121)

This rendition of the parable compares two types of individuals based on their actions and the Torah study. The first person, with both good deeds and extensive Torah knowledge, is likened to a builder who constructs with stones at the foundation and bricks at the top. Even when confronted with a great flood, the solid foundation remains intact, symbolizing that the combination of good deeds and Torah learning will withstand God’s judgment. In contrast, the second person lacks good deeds but has studied the Torah, resembling a builder who constructs with bricks at the foundation and stones at the top. Even a small amount of water is enough to overturn the weak foundation, illustrating that mere knowledge acquisition without good deeds cannot pass God’s judgment.

3.2. Two Forms of Piety

Despite Avot D’Rabbi Nathan being a collection of somewhat disconnected epigrams and maxims providing advice on various aspects of Israelites’ daily life, its two primary themes or emphases can be recognized as the study of the Torah and the performance of good works. (Goldin 1945, p. 97) Notably, there are two versions of Avot D’Rabbi Nathan: one found as a minor tractate appended to the Talmud and another discovered by Solomon Schechter in the nineteenth century and published in 1887. (Goldin 1945, p. 97). According to Judah Goldin, each version reflects one of these two emphases.

Theme or emphasis of version I [i.e., the Talmudic version] of Abot de Rabbi Nathan is the study of the Torah. Again and again throughout the text our version [i.e., the Talmudic version] goes out of its way to underscore the importance of the Torah study. And this emphasis is so strong as to leave the impression that version I is primarily concerned with the study of the Torah, while version II [the Schechter version] would underline “good works” or “good deeds”.

(Goldin 1945, pp. 98–99)

Nevertheless, as far as the parable is concerned, the form of piety that engages both the study of the Torah and good works is the one that is taught and encouraged, while the one focused solely on study is admonished. Another rabbinic text, the sixth-century mishnaic tractate Kiddushin also says: “Study is greater, but not as an independent value; rather, it is greater as study leads to action” (Sefaria 2022b, 40b:8). A broader cosmic perspective is also presented in Avot D’Rabbi Nathan, attributed to Shimon the Righteous, saying that “On three things does the world stand, on the Torah, and on the Temple service, and on deeds of loving kindness.” (Neusner 1997, p. 33).

The Temple service, of course, has been suspended since the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE, but the calling remains in the Torah, and it is accentuated in שְׁמַע Shema (Hear), which is a central aspect of Judaism, consisting of three scriptural passages (Deuteronomy 6:4–9, 11:13–21; Numbers 15:37–41) coupled with prayers (Britannica 2023). It is integral to morning and evening services and is named after its opening word: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord is our God, the Lord alone. You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might”. (Deut. 6:4). It admonishes Israelites not to serve or worship other gods (Deut. 11:16) and instructs them to keep their body and mind clean (Num. 19:20). What the rabbinic literature (Avot D’Rabbi Nathan in particular) emphasizes is that, in addition to all these, one should do good works for fellow human beings (“deeds of loving kindness”).

3.3. Two Worlds

The terms “עולם הזה olamhazeh (this world)” and “עוֹלָם הַבָּא olamhaba (the world to come)” are frequently employed in rabbinic literature to describe the individual’s journey from one realm to the next. Neusner explains:

If we were to ask the authorship of Avot to spell out their teleology, they would draw our attention to the numerous sayings about this life’s being a time of preparation for the life of the world to come, on the one side, and to judgment and eternal life, on the other. The focus is on the individual and how he or she lives in this world and prepares for the next. The category is the individual, and, commonly in the two documents before us when we speak of the individual, we also tend to find the language of “this world” and “the world to come”, olamhazeh, olamhaba.

(Neusner 1997, p. xlvii)

In the journey between olamhazeh and olamhaba, the latter is the destination, the desired and sought-after place, while the former serves as the temporary passage and a ground for preparation. As Pirkei Avot puts it: “The world is like a vestibule before the world-to-be; prepare yourself in the vestibule, so that you may enter the banqueting-hall.”(Sefaria 2022e, 4:16). Building upon this teaching, the eighteenth-century Mesilat Yesharim expands further, stating: “But the path to arrive at the ‘desired haven’ (Ps. 107:30) of ours is this world. This is what our sages of blessed memory said: ‘this world is like a corridor before the world-to-come,’” (Sefaria 2022c, 1:3). and “The general principle of this matter: man was not created for his state in this world, but rather, for his state in the world-to-come. Only that his state in this world is a means towards his state in world-to-come, which is his ultimate purpose.” (Sefaria 2022c, 1:15).

The following sayings from Avot D’Rabbi Nathan teach that a person who does not share part of what they earn with others in olamhazeh will not receive anything in olamhaba, and they allude to the framework of olamhazeh and olamhaba being implied in Ezekiel 2:10. Moreover, they highlight the existence of a trade-off between the pleasures experienced in olamhazeh and olamhaba. These three points collectively provide insights into the interconnection between actions in this world and their consequences in the world-to-come, as well as the dynamics of pleasure and rewards between the two realms.

Para. A, Section VI, Chapter XII:

A. Just as a person does not share in the wage of his fellow in this world, so he does not share in the wage of his fellow in the world to come …

(Neusner 1997, p. 78)

Paras. A–D, Section II, Chapter XXV:

A. And there was written therein lamentations and jubilant sound and woe (Ez. 2:10):

B. Lamentations refers to the penalty inflicted on the wicked in this world, …

C. … and jubilant sound and woe refers to the reward of the righteous in the world to come, …

D. … and woe: refers to the punishment that is coming to the wicked in the world to come, …”

(Neusner 1997, p. 126)

Paras. A–B, Chapter XXVIII:

A. R. Judah the Patriarch says, ‘From whoever is glad to get the pleasures of this world are held back the pleasures of the world to come.

B. ‘And to whoever is not glad to get the pleasures of this world are given the pleasures of the world to come’.”

(Neusner 1997, p. 138)

There is an emphasis that there will be no opportunity to do good works in olamhaba, even if one wishes to. The sixth-century Avodah Zarah says:

What is the meaning of that which is written: ‘You shall therefore keep the commandment, and the statutes, and the ordinances, which I command you this day, to do them’ (Deuteronomy 7:11)? This verse teaches that today, in this world, is the time to do them, but tomorrow, in the world-to-come, is not the time to do them. Furthermore, today is the time to do them, but today is not the time to receive one’s reward, which is granted in world-to-come.

(Sefaria 2022a, 3a:11)

The olamhazeh-olamhaba regime does not appear to be eschatological in the sense of one world ending and another beginning. Instead, as Neusner observes, it relates to “the individual and how he or she lives in this world and prepares for the next”. The two worlds exist concurrently, and a person transitions from one to the other after completing life in this one, akin to moving from one space to another. This perspective is notably emphasized in the twelfth-century Mishneh the Torah, Repentance:

The reason why the sages styled it the world-to-come is not because it is not now in existence and will only come into being when this world shall have passed away. That is not so. The world-to-come now exists, as it is said, ‘which Thou hast treasured up (for them that fear Thee), which Thou hast wrought (for them that trust in Thee before the children of men”) (Ps. 31:19–20). It is called the world-to-come, only because human beings will enter into it at a time subsequent to the life of the present world in which we now exist with body and soul, and this existence comes first.

(Sefaria 2022d, 8:8)

4. The Parable in the Sermon on the Mount of the Gospels

On a mountain in Matthew and a level place in Luke, Jesus delivers His famous sermon to disciples and a multitude. The sermon concludes with the parable of the two builders, stressing the importance of practicing His teachings, not just hearing them.

4.1. Imagery

The Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 7:24–27 (NRSV) states:

7:24 Everyone then who hears these words of mine and acts on them will be like a wise man who built his house on rock.

7:25 The rain fell, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on rock.

7:26 And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not act on them will be like a foolish man who built his house on sand.

7:27 The rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell—and great was its fall!

The Sermon on the Plain in Luke 6:47-49 (NRSV) records:

6:47 “I will show you what someone is like who comes to me, hears my words, and acts on them.

6:48 That one is like a man building a house, who dug deeply and laid the foundation on rock; when a flood arose, the river burst against that house but could not shake it, because it had been well built.

6:49 But the one who hears and does not act is like a man who built a house on the ground without a foundation. When the river burst against it, immediately it fell, and great was the ruin of that house.

The parable portrays a wise man who builds his house on rock (Matthew), even digging deep to reach the rock if necessary (Luke). In contrast, a foolish man builds his house on sand (Matthew) or on the surface of the land (Luke). When nature tests the houses, with rain, flood, and wind (flood only in Luke), the house built by the wise stands, whereas the one built by the foolish completely collapses. The wise man symbolizes those who not only hear the words of Jesus but also act upon them, while the foolish man represents those who only listen but take no action. When the end time and judgment arrive, those in the latter category will face great suffering.

4.2. Two Forms of Piety

Regarding the words of Jesus referred to in the parable, they are understood to be His teachings in the Sermon on the Mount, rather than His teachings in the Gospels generally. Strecker highlights the demonstrative pronoun τούτους (‘these’) in 7:28 (and likely in 7:24 as well), which clearly points back to the words of the Preacher on the mount (Strecker 1988, p. 172). Hearing His words means receiving His teachings on the Beatitudes, love for enemies, almsgiving, prayer, fasting, the Golden Rule, hypocrisy of judging, wealth, anxiety, prayer, and the closing admonitions and parables.

The crowds were astounded at His authoritative teaching, distinguishing Him from their scribes (Matt 7:28–29). As Strecker notes, Jesus’ teachings rest squarely on His own authority as the eschatological Lord:

The Sermon on the Mount cannot be properly understood apart from the person of Jesus. Its interpretation cannot ignore the fact that Jesus as the teacher of the Sermon on the Mount is at the same time the eschatological Lord and Son of God, the revealer of God’s will, as he is presented by the prologue of Matthew’s Gospel (1: 18ff) and also by his shout of joy and redemption (11:25–30). This teacher is not simply comparable to a Jewish scribe. His teaching contains an eschatological call to decision, for it is expressed with divine ἐξουσία (“authority” 7:29). It points ahead to the eschaton and through teaching makes it present. Therefore, the ethical admonition of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount is an eschatological demand.

(Strecker 1988, p. 26)

Listening to and understanding the teachings of Jesus is important but putting them into action is equally essential. Acting on His words involves embodying the spirit of the Beatitudes, such as being humble, compassionate, meek, seeking righteousness, showing mercy, being pure in heart, promoting peace, and practicing forgiveness. It also entails giving to those in need, loving enemies, being genuine and honest, avoiding hypocrisy, trusting in God, refraining from judging others, and adhering to the principle of “in everything do to others as you would have them do to you” (Matt 7:12).

4.3. Two Worlds

The term kosmos κόσμος (the world) appears once in the Sermon, in Matt 5:14–16:

5:14 You are the light of the world. A city built on a hill cannot be hid.

5:15 People do not light a lamp and put it under the bushel basket; rather, they put it on the lampstand, and it gives light to all in the house.

5:16 In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father in heaven.

Here, kala erga καλὰ ἔργα (good works) refer to putting the teachings of Jesus into action, and the purpose of these good works is to serve as “the light of the world”, illuminating the way for others so that they may witness and glorify God the Father in heaven.

In contrast to kosmos, basileia ton ouranon βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν (kingdom of heaven) appears about ten times in the Sermon, warning that not all who call Jesus “Lord, Lord” will enter the kingdom of heaven (Matt 7:21–23); emphasizing that those who follow and teach the commandments will be esteemed highly in the kingdom of heaven (5:19–20); providing instructions on praying for and seeking the coming of the kingdom (6:10, 33); and assuring through the Beatitudes that the poor in spirit and persecuted will inherit the kingdom of heaven (5:3, 10, 6:33). The eschatological nature is grounded in Jesus being the eschatological Lord, the general eschatological outlook of the Sermon, and is explicitly revealed in verses like “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (5:3) and “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matt 5:10). Entering the kingdom of heaven and receiving rewards hinge on one’s willingness to carry out the good works commanded by Jesus.

The kingdom of heaven does not primarily carry an anthropological or ethical connotation; instead, it represents a cosmic domain transcending humanity, and its eschatological fulfillment will encompass both heaven and earth (Strecker 1988, p. 114). As evident from the cited passages, the kingdom represents a future realm that is hoped for and anticipated. This world, on the other hand, serves as the stage for such hope and anticipation, and it is not prominently highlighted. When mentioned, its primary meaning is to allow for a time and stage for evangelization and salvation, rather than for individuals doing the right thing in this world so as to be compensated in the next.

5. Comparing the Versions

In this section, we will compare the three versions of the parable and determine which—Builders/Rabbinic or Builders/Gospels—bears a closer resemblance to Builders/YSL.

5.1. Imagery

Both Builders/YSL and Builders/Rabbinic center their imagery on a house, and the choices are whether the house is to be fastened or not to the ground (Builders/YSL), or whether it is to be built with stones down first or bricks down first (Builders/Rabbinic). In contrast, Builders/Gospels focuses on the terrain, and the choices are between a rocky site or a sandy site.

5.2. Piety

Each rendition of the parable underscores the significance of virtuous deeds, highlighting the notion that piety devoid of corresponding actions remains inherently incomplete. Beyond this commonality, notable parallels emerge between the teachings of rabbinic tradition and the spiritual philosophy of YSL. In the realm of rabbinic piety, the meticulous study of Torah, with the Shema prayer serving as its focal point, accentuates the divine unity, cautions against the worship of other deities, and champions both spiritual and physical purity. Similarly, YSL underscores earnest devotion to a singular God, warns against demonic worship, emphasizes obedience to divine directives, and advocates for the preservation of mental and physical integrity. In stark contrast, the Builders/Gospels pivots around the centrality of Jesus as the Lord and Son of God, urging adherence not only to His teachings but also their practical implementation. The teachings within Builders/Rabbinic and Builders/YSL exhibit a distinctly human presentation, deriving authority solely from the role of a rabbi or teacher. Conversely, the Gospel iteration is positioned as a divine teaching, carrying the authoritative weight of the Son of God.

5.3. Two Worlds

Builders/YSL and Builders/Rabbinic both underscore that present actions shape the future, emphasizing preparation in this world and the absence of opportunities in the world-to-come. These two traditions exhibit strong textual alignments, portraying the concurrency of the two worlds that coexist. Conversely, Builders/Gospels introduces “kosmos” and the “kingdom of heaven”, which are not concurrent but consecutive, emphasizing cosmic transformation and divine fulfillment beyond earthly life. Hence, Builders/YSL resonates more with Builders/Rabbinic, focusing on molding the future through present actions, while Builders/Gospels presents a vision of eschatological consecutiveness, portraying the present world as a time or dispensation for spreading the gospel.

A striking terminological parallel exists between the paired terms “citianxia-bitianxia” in YSL and the paired terms “olamhazeh-olamhaba” in rabbinic literature. Notably evident in rabbinic literature, the term “olamhaba”, though absent from the Hebrew Bible or Second Temple Hebrew writings, appears frequently, exceeding two thousand times, often accompanied by “olamhazeh.” (Weiss 2017, p. 91). A corresponding pattern exists in YSL, where the terms “citianxia” and “bitianxia”, along with their variations, feature 58 times within 60 lines of text. This significant terminological symmetry underscores the profound affinity shared between YSL and rabbinic literature in encapsulating the concept of two interconnected worlds.

The comparison is summarized in the

Table 1. Comparison of Parable of Wise and Foolish Builders in YSL, Rabbinic Literature, and the Gospels.

	Builders/YSL	Builders/Rabbinic	Builders/Gospels
Imagery	Centers on the house	Centers on the house	Centers on the terrain
- Choices	- anchored or not to the ground.	- stones down first or bricks down first.	- rocky site or sandy site
Two Forms of Piety	Centers on God	Centers on God	Centers on Jesus, the Lord and Son of God.
- First form	- loving, worshipping, and obeying the only one God, adhering solely to His commands, maintaining cleanliness in mind and body, rejecting the worship of demons and purging one’s heart of malice, venom, revenge, or jealousy.	- studying the Torah, the core of which is the Shema prayer calling for the loving, worshipping, and serving God, rejecting other gods, keeping the body and mind clean.	- hearing the word of Jesus, the Lord and Son of God, which covers the Beatitudes, trust in God, the Golden Rule, honesty, kindness, love for people (even enemies), avoidance of judging and hypocrisy.
- Second form	- doing all the above plus doing good works, which mainly means almsgiving.	- doing all the above plus doing good works, which mainly means almsgiving.	- hearing and doing what Jesus, the Lord and Son of God, has taught.
- Divine authority Claimed	- no	- no	- yes
Two Worlds	Two realms of human existence	Two realms of human existence	Two domains in God’s salvation plan
- Relationship	- cosmologically concurrent, with this life in this world being the opportunity to earn merits for reward and a better life in the next.	- cosmologically concurrent, with this life in this world being the opportunity to earn merits for reward and a better life in the next.	- eschatologically consecutive, with life in this world being the light to bear witness for Christ and to save people.
- Textual alignments	- “citianxia-bitianxia”, featuring 58 occurrences within the 60 lines of text.	- “olamhazeh-olamhaba”, exceeding two thousand occurrences in rabbinic literature.	-

below:

To sum up, the findings assert that, in terms of metaphor and religious language, Builders/YSL and Builders/Rabbinic exhibit a closer affinity. They emphasize the house and two methods of construction, while Builders/Gospels centers around the site and two types of terrain. Concerning piety, both Builders/YSL and Builders/Rabbinic, as human teachings, exhort fellow humans to dedicate themselves to God, emphasizing the maintenance of spiritual, mental, and physical purity. In contrast, Builders/Gospels presents a divine set of teachings to be heard and implemented in daily life. Regarding the two worlds, Builders/YSL and Builders/Rabbinic depict them as concurrent, with divine judgments upon transition, while Builders/Gospels envisions eschatologically consecutive worlds, with judgment at the end of time.21 Notably, YSL’s “citianxia-bitianxia” and the rabbinic “olamhazeh-olamhaba” are terminologies closely in parallel, and such an equivalent cannot be found in Builders/Gospels.

6. Conclusions

Traditionally, YSL has been designated as an “Aluoben document” in the Jingjiao corpus, a classification introduced by Saeki in 1937 (Saeki [1937] 1951, p. 113). This classification primarily relied on aligning YSL’s dates (circa 641 CE) with the arrival of Aluoben in Chang’an (635 CE), as documented in the Jingjiao Daqin Jingjiao Liuxing Zhongguo Bei 大秦景教流行中國碑 [Monument Commemorating the Propagation of Daqin Jingjiao in China] (“the Monument”) (Saeki [1937] 1951, pp. 114–5). The underlying assumption was that during the Tang Dynasty, only one history or tradition of Christianity existed in China, as narrated by the Monument, leading to the a priori position that all Christian relics or manuscripts from that period must be, without question, Jingjiao-related. While this association may seem reasonable for manuscripts sharing the same name as the Monument (i.e., “Daqin Jingjiao 大秦景教”), verification is essential for those, like YSL, that do not. The hypothesis of categorizing everything under Jingjiao needs scrutiny, and unfortunately, both Saeki’s works and contemporary Jingjiao scholarship have shown a lack of initiative in conducting verifications through methods such as textual criticism.

In this study, we identified parallels between YSL and rabbinic literature, specifically in their use of the parable of the Wise and Foolish Builders and associated passages. Tentatively, we could infer that YSL, despite being a Christian document, incorporates distinctive elements from the Jewish tradition. Across publications since 2018, this author has demonstrated that YSL presents a unique set of divine designations, suggesting a potential connection to a distinct Christian community and tradition (Tam 2018a, 2018b, 2021b). Additionally, he has outlined its overarching theme, purpose, and structure (Tam 2022a), questioned its association with the Monument and Aluoben, cast doubt on Chang’an as the probable place of authorship, and proposed that western locales such as Gaochang (Turfan) in Xiyu (Western Region) are more likely settings for its creation (Tam 2021a, 2022b). These findings hint at the possibility that YSL was composed by a Christian community with a Jewish heritage in the seventh century, in Xiyu. Regardless, the document remains an open field for exploration and scholarly investigation, demanding rigorous exegesis and textual criticism.