(, The Book of the Generations/History/Life of Jesus), often abbreviated as Toledot Yeshu, is a medieval text which presents an alternative, anti-sectarian view, as well as a disputed biography of Jesus of Nazareth. It exists in a number of different versions, none of which is considered either canonical or normative within Rabbinic literature, but which appear to have been widely circulated in Europe and the Middle East in the medieval period. A 15th-century Yemenite version of the text was titled , or the "Episode of Jesus", in which Jesus is described either as being the son of Joseph or the son of Pandera. The account portrays Jesus as an impostor.
The Toledot portrays Jesus (known as by the author, the actual Hebrew name) as an illegitimate child who practiced sorcery, taught a heretical Judaism, seduced women, and died a shameful death. Interestingly, the author also shows a paradoxical respect for Jesus. Perhaps surprisingly, instead of denying the miracles the New Testament claims Jesus had performed, Toledot Yeshu doubles down. The difference, of course, is that in this polemic his powers are chalked up to sacrilegious sorcery, while the authors of the New Testament portrayed these events as proof of divine power. In some versions of Toledot Yeshu, Jesus is noted to have revived a man from the dead, turn clay statues into flying birds, and lift his arms like the wings of an eagle, ascending towards the heavens for an airborne battle with Judah Iskarioto. As Joseph Dan notes in the Encyclopaedia Judaica, "The narrative in all versions treats Jesus as an exceptional person who, from his youth, demonstrated unusual wit and wisdom, but disrespect toward his elders and the sages of his age." Robert Van Voorst calls the a record of popular polemic "run wild." The 's profane portrayal of the person Christians consider divine has provided fodder for Christian antisemitism and anti-Judaism.
Until the early 21st century (with few exceptions), mainstream Jewish and Christian scholars paid little attention to the . The opinion of noted advocate of Christian-Jewish reconciliation, Father Edward H. Flannery, is representative:
This disregard has recently shifted towards a growing level of discussion on the text's possible scholarly use as a window into the early history of Jewish-Christian relations.
Composition and dating
Recent scholarship has drawn attention to the date of origin of the . The earliest layers are considered to have been manufactured orally, and written source material of the is much older than the work itself. As Flannery states:
The first textual evidence consists of fragments of Aramaic manuscripts discovered in Cairo. A recent study reports that more than 100 manuscripts of the exist, almost all of them late medieval (the oldest manuscript being from the 11th century). The earliest stratum of composition was probably in Aramaic. There are recensions extant in Hebrew, and later versions in Judeo-Persian and Arabic, as well as in Yiddish and Ladino (Judeo-Spanish).
The date of composition cannot be ascertained with certainty and there are conflicting views as to what markers denote dates. For instance, some manuscripts of the (called the Helena-recension and unattested before the 13th century) refer to Christian festivals and observances that only originated after the 4th century. This does not account for all of the manuscripts and those that were created earlier do not mention the festivals. In Origen's (likely written in the 3rd century AD), Origen quotes Celsus as calling Jesus "son of Pantera," which would point to Celsus' knowledge of the or its source material. In his Incredible Shrinking Son of Man, Robert M. Price states that the Toledot Yeshu is "dependent on second-century Jewish-Christian gospel", and Alexander argues that the oral traditions behind the written versions of the might go all the way back to the formation of the canonical narratives themselves.
It is unlikely that one person is the author, since the narrative itself has a number of different versions, which differ in terms of the story details and the attitude towards the central characters. Even individual versions seem to come from a number of storytellers.
Some scholars assert that the source material is no earlier than the 6th century, and the compilation no earlier than the 9th century. Although individual anecdotes that make up the may all come from sources dating before the sixth century, there is no evidence that their gathering into a single narrative is that early. Some scholars, like Jeffrey Rubenstein, favour a later composition date, after the 7th century.