Toledot Yeshu

This article attempts to advance a number of claims concerning the Zohar’s exegetical presentation of the biblical story of the blasphemer (Lev. 24: 10-23). The major thesis of the article is that the Zoharic interpretation contains a hidden anti-Christian polemic—one aimed directly at the figures of Jesus and the Virgin Mary. To prove this, the article shows that the Zohar’s language concerning the blasphemer recalls tropes and structures from the popular medieval polemical work, Toledot Yeshu.
The article provides a significant understanding of the ambivalent Zoharic attitude towards Jesus as the Son of God – and of the Virgin Mary as linked to the Shekhinah.

This article was previously published in my Ph.D. dissertation in 2012 (Hebrew).

The article focuses on El'azar berabbi Qillir, the iconic pay�an of all ages, and explores several aspects of his work, heritage and cultural significance. The var- ious parts of the article do not present a cohesive image of the life and work of the Qilliri. Rather, they present a mosaic of different outlooks on his image as well as scholarly reflections on some of his major contributions to Jewish literary culture.

A close reading of a passage describing the installation of the Christian festival calendar in the Anti-Acts part of the Toledot Yeshu in combination with what we know of early Christian liturgy and festival calendars. It shows that this part of the Jewish Anti-Christian novel has to be provenanced to Palestine or Syria in the early fifth century CE. Without having been acquainted with his study, it lines up rather nicely with the results of a recent linguistic study of the Aramaic versions of Toledot Yeshu by Willem Smelik.

The Jewish life of Jesus (Toledoth Yeshu) constitutes one of the most important Jewish anti-Christian literary traditions. Its development can be followed in the long run of Jewish-Christian relations and polemics from late antiquity to the modern period. Toledoth Yeshu presents us with a Jewish account of Christianity, mocking Jesus as an illegitimate child and a charlatan, and describing his disciples as a bunch of violent rogues. A “best-seller” among medieval Jews, Toledoth Yeshu was also discussed by Christian scholars with a view to expose the alleged Jewish hatred of Christianity in their own anti-Jewish polemics. In the Enlightenment context, Toledoth Yeshu came to be subverted by authors such as Voltaire, with the intention to foster their critique of religion and question the historical status of the biblical narrative.
Whereas Toledoth Yeshu has most often been studied from a text-critical perspective, the present conference aims to go beyond philological debates and explore the place and function of Toledoth Yeshu within the different historical and cultural contexts in which it surfaces and circulates. This conference will thus connect recent inquiries into this text to wider issues pertaining to the historical construction, transformation, and preservation of religious identities, and their inherent discourses on gender, ethnicity, and religion.

SUMMARY: Jesus' name does not appear in the Mishna: it is in the Tosefta that it makes its first appearance. Notwithstanding, it is present ten times in the two Talmuds in the form Yeshu - ישו -, Yeshu ha-Notsri - ישו הנוצרי -, or Yeshu ben Panthera (or Pandera) - ישו בן פנטרא –…

RÉSUMÉ : Le nom de Jésus ne figure pas dans la Mishna : c’est dans la Tosefta qu’il fait sa première apparition. Nonobstant, il est présent une dizaine de fois dans les deux Talmuds sous la forme Yeshu – ישו –, Yeshu ha-Notsri  – ישו הנוצרי –, ou Yeshu ben Panthera (ou Pandera) – ישו בן פנטרא –...

The text of this current translation comes from Samuel Krauss’ 1902 collection of manuscript transcriptions—originally found in Cod. Heb. 54 of the Vienna Israelite Theological Library, but denominated by Krauss as “Ms. Vindobona,” after the Latin name for Vienna. The manuscript was allegedly stolen from the Institute’s library by the Nazis, and subsequently disappeared—possibly being either destroyed or looted during the bombing of Berlin. The truth of this lost manuscript may never be known, but a few things are clear: despite its sometimes disturbing content, the text is a paradox, both vulgarly base and eloquently beautiful, epic satire, tragically antiheroic, and altogether exceptional literature worthy of appreciation by the humanities.

Based on:
Krauss, Samuel, ed. Das Leben Jesu: Nach Judischen Quellen. Berlin: S. Calvary,
1902.

This is a translation of the Huldreich text of the Toldot Yeshu (Generations of Jesus). The text comes from the Christian Hebraist Johann Jacob Huldreich, who in his 1705 Historia Jeschuae Nazareni published a hitherto unknown form of the literature in Leyden, the Netherlands, accompanied by an annotated Latin translation. No manuscript of Huldreich’s exemplar survives, which is a lamentable loss, but perhaps more unfortunate is its continuing obscurity, having until now continued without a complete English translation from the Hebrew. While Huldreich’s text is substantially different from any other Toldot Yeshu writings, it is a masterpiece of profane Hebraica in its own right, one whose lacuna of study alongside the others is unjustifiable.

Based on:
Huldreich, Johann Jacob, ed. Sepher Toldot Yeshua Ha-Notzri: Historia Jeschuae
Nazareni . Leiden: 1705.

Albright argues for יהוה being in the form of a imperfect third person hifil verb corresponding to יהיה from the root הי''ה which  reflects Aramaic הו''ה. Gordon argues for יהוה being pronounced yehovah that is yod heh vav heh vocalised with sere, holem, qamatz. He argues it is not connected to hovah destruction because hovah is from the root הו''ה  but based on Ex. 3:16 יהוה is from the root הי''ה. He argues it is a combination of past present and future forms of the root and  he bases his argument on a thousand very late manuscripts of the Tanakh. Mowinckel argues from a north Sinaitic origin for  the name יהוה distinguishing between the original meaning and later developement. Based on the exclamation יה combined with the third person pronoun הוא producing Ya huwah or Ya' huah. We for personal and scientific reason side with Mowinckel and address this debate in a personal letter.
Someone read a Letter on the Pronunciation of the Tetrgrammaton and asked why Yahuah was the way the writer chose to pronounce the name instead of Yahweh or Yehovah. This letter gives personal reasons and academic reasons. It is written as a member of the faith community of the "Saints" or Charismatic Church. First it covers the leading of the Holy Spirit in inspiring the writer to research and inveistigate the name by the use of coincidences in gematria and times. Then iit goes into the experience of modern day tongues and it part in restoring the pronunciation of the name. Then it goes into the the academic confirmations of the resutls of the experience, especially the article of Mowinkel "The Name of the God of Moses"

This article examines indications from Judeo-Arabic, Hebrew and Latin
sources which suggest that one or more versions of the Toledot Yeshu, theJewish “counter-gospel”, were circulating in Egypt, Castile and northernEurope during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, and that this tale wasparticularly popular in Iberia during the thirteenth centuries. The articlefocuses on the tale of the Hebrew youth and the magician in Ibn Sahula’sMeshal ha-Qadmoni, suggesting that Ibn Sahula used elements of the ToledotYeshu which his audience would have recognized, but changed portionsof the Toledot narrative. Ibn Sahula did so in order to shape it into a polemic against Jewish courtiers, too intrigued with Christian culture, women andthe study of magic, astrology, and divination at King Alfonso x’s court.

SUMMARY: This study presents a survey and a systematic analysis of the passages of Talmudic literature (Mishna – Tosefta – Palestinian Talmud – Babylonian Talmud – Midrashim), relative to Jesus or are supposed to be. The documents are examined, criticized and confronted to other sources of Jewish or Christian origin (Hellenistic Jewish literature, Jewish Apocrypha, rabbinic sources, Targumim, Toledot Yeshu – New Testament, Apostolic Fathers, Church Fathers). The investigation tries to answer to several questions:

- What did the rabbis exactly know about Jesus?
- Has their information any historical value?
- Has their perception undergone some evolution?
- Did the rabbis of the Talmud have access to the Gospels as a written source?

The conclusion of this thesis is that all these documents are rooted in their Sitz im leben. They obviously attest – contra Peter Schäfer (Jesus in the Talmud, 2007) – that the rabbis had no direct acquaintance with the Gospels as written documents. This study also shows, concerning the Babylonian Talmud, that all the passages relative to Jesus belong to the last editorial layer of this corpus (VIIe-VIIIe century).

RÉSUMÉ : Cette étude présente un relevé et une analyse systématique des passages de la littérature rabbinique (Mishna – Tosefta – Talmud de Jérusalem – Talmud de Babylone – Midrashim) se rapportant à Jésus ou susceptibles de s’y rapporter. Les documents sont examinés, critiqués et confrontés à d’autres sources d’origine juive ou chrétienne (littérature judéo-hellénistique, apocryphes juifs, sources rabbiniques, Targumim, Toledot Yeshu – Nouveau Testament, Pères apostoliques, Père de l’église). L’enquête tente de répondre à plusieurs questions :

- Quelle connaissance les rabbins avaient-ils exactement de Jésus ?
- Quelle est la valeur historique de ces informations ?
- Leur perception du personnage a-t-elle connu une évolution ?
- Les scribes du Talmud consultaient-ils le texte écrit des évangiles ?

La conclusion de cette thèse est que tous ces documents sont enracinés dans leur Sitz im leben. Ils attestent sans ambages – contra Peter Schäfer (Jesus in the Talmud, 2007) – que les rabbins n’avaient pas une connaissance directe des évangiles en tant que documents écrits. Cette étude montre également, concernant le Talmud de Babylone, que tous les passages se rapportant à Jésus appartiennent à la dernière couche éditoriale de ce corpus (VIIe-VIIIe siècle).

Toledot Yeshu (The Jewish Life of Jesus) is perhaps one of the most infamous retellings of the Gospel narrative of the pre-modern era. The present essay explores its reception and circulation among both Jews and Christians in the period before and after the first editions of the work, by J. C. Wagenseil in 1681 and J. J. Huldreich in 1705. The work was an object of fascination for early modern scholars of Judaism and was regularly
invoked in discussions concerned with the Talmud and other Jewish books alleged to be blasphemous. For Jewish scholars, it was a source of embarrassment, although both the manuscript and the documentary evidence demonstrate that many Jews did view Toledot Yeshu as a culturally significant narrative, worthy of being transmitted. It is here
suggested that Toledot Yeshu, with its direct and emotional cogency, combining history, humour and polemics, was indeed recognized by early modern Jews and crypto-Jews as a powerful story, through which they could articulate their identity.

The parodical narrative of the life of Jesus was surprisingly popular among Arabic-speaking Jews and is attested in numerous manuscript fragments. This article is a first foray into the manuscript tradition of Toledot Yeshu in Judeo-Arabic, and maps out newly identified fragments and their content, and offers a consideration of the reason for the work's popularity among the Jews of the Near East.

This is an English translation of a Hebrew cross-finding legend from Samuel Krauss’ 1902 collection of anti-gospel texts commonly denominated ‘Toldot Yeshu’ (Generations of Jesus), originally from a manuscript of the Vienna Israelite Theological Institute’s library (Cod. Heb. 54 Vienna Israelite Theological Library). The text as printed by Krauss begins with “Chapter 22” and is actually the last chapter of another text of the same volume, alternatively called “Ms. Vindobona” after the Latin name for Vienna. The manuscript suffered under the atrocities of the Nazis who stole it from the Institute’s library, thereafter disappearing, either being destroyed or looted during the bombing of Berlin.

Despite the disappearance and continuing obscurity of the text, the tale told is most lively and entertaining, about an attempt during the time of Constantine to find “the tree on which they crucified Yesh``u,” wherein one wise Jewish elder, Rabbi Yehudah, saves his people from persecution and genocide by means of a clever plan of subterfuge involving the miraculous power of the Explicit Name of God. This is but one of many examples of the rich storytelling found among the literature collectively termed ‘Toldot Yeshu.’ Hopefully the reader will likewise find it a most enjoyable story.

Based on:
Krauss, Samuel, ed. Das Leben Jesu: Nach Judischen Quellen. Berlin: S. Calvary,
1902.

A first-time presentation of the initial section of the Toledot Yeshu (TY) narrative describing the birth and early life of Jesus in Judeo-Arabic. The dating and origin of the birth narrative in TY has been debated in recent scholarship on the Hebrew versions of TY, and the identification of this lengthy Judeo-Arabic birth narrative as well as a number of earlier Judeo-Arabic manuscript fragments demonstrates that the birth narrative formed part of TY significantly earlier than previously thought. Furthermore, examination of this early Judeo-Arabic textual tradition reveals interesting connections with particular Hebrew versions of TY from Europe and can shed light on the question of how the work moved between East and West. Finally, this Judeo-Arabic version of TY demonstrates a clever literary adaptation to its Arabic-Islamic linguistic and cultural surroundings.

The anti-judaic polemic of Ephrem the Syrian's Hymns on the Nativity may be a response to an early version of the Toledot Yeshu. if so, these hymns substantiate Krauss's proposal based on Aramaic fragments of the Toledot discovered in the Cairo Geniza. He argued that there was an "Ur-Toldot" strongly influenced by Syriac syntax and possibly dating to  fourth-century Mesopotamia.

Toledot Yeshu, or “Stories about Jesus,” have been transmitted by Jews for centuries but have only recently begun to garner significant scholarly attention as part of a tradition of anti-Christian polemic. This paper contends that the varied depictions of Jesus’ conception in the Toledot corpus reflect the intracommunal issues of forced conversion, apostasy, and over-familiarity with non-Jews. The theme was neither new to the Toledot nor a product of the late-antique and medieval contexts that Jewish stories of Jesus first circulated in. Rather, it echoes biblical representations of, and admonishments against, illicit relationships with non-Jews which ancient authors commonly depicted through a typology of sexual promiscuity. It is only when viewing Toledot presentations of Jesus’ conception in light of both contemporary events and the Jewish biblical literary tradition that we are able to grasp their previously unnoted functions as 1) Jewish self-criticism regarding inter-communal relations; and, 2) a didactic warning to future generations against making similar mistakes.

“‘Piercing What Has Been Sealed’ – The Blasphemer (Lev. 24: 10-16) and  Toledot Yeshu: From the Homilies of the Zohar to ‘Va’avo haYom ’el ha‘Ayin’” (Hebrew), in:  R. Jonathan Eibeschütz ‘And I Came this Day unto the Fountain’ Critically edited and introduced by Paweł Maciejko, (Cherub Press, Los Angeles, 2014), 243-277