Toledot Yeshu, literally "Generations of Yeshu", is the title of several medieval manuscripts containing legends and folktales concerning "Yeshu". These manuscripts are not part of rabbinic literature and are not considered canonical or normative.

There is no one authoritative Toledot Yeshu story; various medieval versions existed that differ in attitudes towards the central characters and in story details; it is considered unlikely that any one person wrote it. Each version seems to be from a different set of storytellers.

The main elements of this story begin with an explanation that Yeshu's mother, Miriam, comes from a good family, and marries a decent man who can trace his line back to King David. However, she is raped by a neighbor. After Miriam is raped, she is left by her husband and left to raise her child alone. Her child, Yeshu is depicted as being of unusual intelligence and wit, but shows disrespect to those older than him and to the sages. The story holds that Yeshu had some supernatural powers, which he obtained by using the name of God written on scroll; Toledot Yeshu also accepts that other rabbinic sages of Yeshu's era could display similar supernatural powers. A struggle emerges between Yeshu and one or more of the sages, and Yeshu is left powerless. The Queen has Yeshu executed and trouble ensues for many decades. Eventually, mysterious sages appoint Simon Caipha to re-establish order.

In the more developed versions of the narrative, the story contains other motifs. Many details were added, secondary characters were developed, and the story became a romance about the tragic fate of a young man mistaken in his ways.

The Toledot Yeshu stories generally show a confounding of the Talmud accounts of the individuals titled Yeshu, ben-Stada and ben-Pandera with the Greek myth of Pandareus, Gospel elements about Jesus and elements resembling the account of Simon Magus in the Acts of Peter, all conflated into a single character called Yeshu. An element concerning the role of the sanctae crucius lignum in the death of Germanic God Balder even seems to have filtered through into the Yiddish versions. The stories typically understand the name Yeshu to be the acronym yemach shemo vezichro but justify its usage by claiming that it is wordplay on his real name Yehoshua.

Accounts of the execution of Yeshu in the Toledot Yeshu do not merely resemble the Gospel accounts of the crucifixion of Jesus but in some points appear more detailed. Zindler argues that this is evidence of a very early interplay between the developing story of Yeshu and the Christian accounts of Jesus before the Gospels reached their final form.

Although the Toledot Yeshu stories seem to identify Yeshu with Jesus they are much later than the primary references in the Talmud and Tosefta upon which they are based and cannot be used to infer that the writers of the Talmuds intended Yeshu to mean Jesus.

Identification of Yeshu with Jesus

Many Jews and Christians have traditionally assumed that the term Yeshu in the Talmud and Tosefta refers to Jesus. Since at least the 12th century the standard Hebrew name for Jesus has been Yeshu. As well, according to articles in The Jewish Encyclopedia (1906), by professor of Hebrew literature Joseph Dan in the Encyclopedia Judaica (1972), and the Encyclopedia Hebraica (Israel) many of the stories about Yeshu in rabbinic literature are understood to be about the Christian Jesus. This is also the view of Steven Bayme, the American Jewish Committee’s director of Contemporary Jewish Life, and Dr. David Kraemer, professor of Talmud and rabbinics at the Jewish Theological Seminary and R. Travers Herford, author of Christianity in Talmud and Midrash.

The argument that Yeshu is the Christian Jesus is based on the observation that the name Yeshu, is similar to Yeshua, which is often believed to be the Aramaic or Hebrew name of Jesus. Certain manuscripts of the Tosefta in fact render the name as Yeshua instead of Yeshu. Moreover it can be argued that the form Yeshu might result from the final consonant of Yeshua (the guttural ayin) becoming a silent letter.

Like Jesus (according to the Gospel of John), Yeshu was executed on the Eve of Passover. The Florence manuscript says in addition that this was the Eve of the Sabbath, which resembles the day of crucifixion according to all four gospels. The term Notzri used in the Munich, Paris, and JTS manuscripts resembles Nazarene.

Some see the Greek for virgin parthenos in the word "Pandera" either as a corrupted pronunciation or an intentional play on words. Others see the names of Jesus' disciples amongst the five disciples of Yeshu; principally Matai and Todah as Matthew and Thaddaeus, though some have gone further and see the names John and Andrew in Buni and Netzer.

To explain the dearth of references to Jesus in the Talmud, it has been argued that

• The Talmud was subject to censorship, as passages deemed blasphemous by the Church were expurgated as of 1264 (The entire Talmud was placed on the Index of Forbidden Books by Pope Paul IV in 1559).
• Although restoring these passages still produces only a few mentions of Yeshu, the Mishnah, which forms the skeleton of the Talmud, was written at a time when Christianity was first emerging. The Christians were just one sect with which the authors contended (others included Sadducees, Samaritans, and Gnostics).
• The final redaction of the Talmud, the Babylonian Talmud was created in Babylonia, where Christianity did not have the same impact as it did in the Mediterranean Basin. As such, it was not perceived of as a particularly noticeable phenomenon.
• The Talmud may mention Jesus and Christianity in coded terms, such as min (מין, sometimes translated "apostate" or "heretic"), though this term refers to various sectarian groups. In terms of labeling Christians as minim it is important to note the adage of Rav Nahman in the name of Rava bar Avuha in Tractate Chullin 13b: There are no minim among the gentiles, i.e., the appellation could only be applied to converts from Judaism.
• The Talmud was essentially the writing down of the basics of the Oral Law - despite its great size, it's still a very condensed form compared to the knowledge that existed originally, therefore, due to the limited space, only the necessities were discussed that might otherwise be forgotten.

Yeshu as a literary device

Recently, some scholars have argued that Yeshu stories provide a more complex view of early Rabbinic-Christian interactions. Whereas the Pharisees were one sect among several others in the Second Temple era, the Amoraim and Tannaim sought to establish Rabbinic Judaism as the normative form of Judaism. Like the Rabbis, early Christians claimed to be working within Biblical traditions to provide new interpretations of Jewish laws and values. The sometimes blurry boundary between the Rabbis and early Christians provided an important site for distinguishing between legitimate debate and heresy. Scholars like Rabbi Jeffrey Rubenstein (PhD. in Religion from Columbia University; professor of Hebrew and Judaic Studies at New York University) and Dr. Daniel Boyarin, a professor of Talmud at the University of California, Berkeley, argue that it was through the Yeshu narratives that Rabbis confronted this blurry boundary.

Jeffrey Rubenstein has argued that the accounts in Chullin and Avodah Zarah reveal an ambivalent relationship between rabbis and Christianity. In his view the tosefta account reveals that at least some Jews believed Christians were true healers, but that the rabbis saw this belief as a major threat. Concerning the Babylonian Talmud account in Avoda Zarah, Dr. Boyarin views Jacob of Sechania as a Christian preacher and understands Rabbi Eliezer's arrest for minuth as an arrest by the Romans for practising Christianity (the text uses the word for heretic). When the Governor (the text uses the word for chief judge) interrogated him, the Rabbi answered that he "trusted the judge." Boyarin has suggested that this was the Jewish version of the Br'er Rabbit approach to domination, which he contrasts to the strategy of many early Christians, who proclaim their beliefs in spite of the consequences (i.e. martyrdom). Although Rabbi Eliezer was referring to God, the Governor interpreted him to be referring to the Governor himself, and freed the Rabbi. According to them the account also reveals that there was greater contact between Christians and Jews in the second century than commonly believed. They view the account of the teaching of Yeshu as an attempt to mock Christianity. According to Dr. Rubenstein, the structure of this teaching, in which a Biblical prooftext is used to answer a question about Biblical law, is common to both the Rabbis and early Christians. The vulgar content, however, may have been used to parody Christian values. Dr. Boyarin considers the text to be an acknowledgment that Rabbis often interacted with Christians, despite their doctrinal antipathy.

According to Dr. Rubenstein, the account in Sanhedrin 107b recognizes the kinship between Christians and Jews, since Jesus is presented as a disciple of a prominent Rabbi. But it also reflects and speaks to an anxiety fundamental to Rabbinic Judaism. Prior to the destruction of the Temple in 70, Jews were divided into different sects, each promoting different interpretations of the law. Rabbinic Judaism domesticated and internalized conflicts over the law, while vigorously condemning any sectarianism. In other words, rabbis are encouraged to disagree and argue with one another, but these activities must be carefully contained, or else they could lead to a schism. Although this story may not present a historically accurate account of Jesus' life, it does use a fiction about Jesus to communicate an important truth about the Rabbis (see Jeffrey Rubenstein, Rabbinic Stories). Moreover, Rubenstein sees this story as a rebuke to overly harsh Rabbis. Boyarin suggests that the Rabbis were well aware of Christian views of the Pharisees and that this story acknowledges the Christian belief that Jesus was forgiving and the Pharisees were not (see Mark 2:1-2), while emphasizing forgiveness as a necessary Rabbinic value.

Criticism of the identification of Yeshu with Jesus

Critics of the identification of Yeshu with Jesus point to inconsistencies between the Talmudic references to Yeshu and ben-Stada and the stories about Jesus in the New Testament. The oppression by King Jannæus mentioned in the Talmud occurred about 87 BCE, which would put the events of the story about a century before Jesus. The Yeshu who taught Jacob of Sechania would have lived a century after Jesus. The forty day waiting period before execution is absent from the Christian tradition and moreover Jesus did not have connections with the government. Jesus was crucified not stoned. Jesus was executed in Jerusalem not Lod. Jesus did not burn his food in public and moreover the Yeshu who did this corresponds to Manasseh of Judah in the Shulkhan Arukh. Jesus did not make incisions in his flesh, nor was he caught by hidden observers. In the 13th century Jehiel ben Joseph of Paris wrote that the Yeshu in rabbinic literature was a disciple of Joshua ben Perachiah, and not to be confused with Jesus the Nazarene (Vikkuah Rabbenu Yehiel mi-Paris). Nahmanides too makes this point, and Rabbis Jacob ben Meir (Rabbeinu Tam) (12th century) and Jehiel Heilprin (17th century) also belong to this school. Likewise the comments of Rabbi Jacob Emden cannot be reconciled with the collective identification. In addition, the information cited from the Munich, Florence and other manuscripts in support of the identification are late comments written centuries after the original redaction of the Talmud.

The resemblance of the name Yeshu to Yeshua which some assume to be the original Hebrew or Aramaic for Jesus, is of questionable importance. The guttural consonant ayin at the end of the latter name forms part of the root but is absent from Yeshu. Although, as remarked above, the ayin became a silent letter no other case is known of where this led to a dropping of the consonant in spelling nor of where it led to a complete dropping of its accompanying vowel (the patach genuvah denoting a modified pronunciation of the preceding "u") as would be the case if Yeshu were derived from Yeshua. The occurrence of Yeshua instead of Yeshu in certain manuscripts of the Tosefta is accompanied by anomalous spellings of Pandera and based on comparison of texts both are seen as erroneous attempts at correction by a copyist unfamiliar with the terms. Moreover, Yeshua (Jeshua in English) is not necessarily the original form of Jesus. In the Septuagint and Greek language Jewish texts such as the writings of Josephus and Philo of Alexandria, Jesus is the standard Greek translation of the common Hebrew name Yehoshua (Joshua), Greek having lost the h sound, as well as of the shortened form Yeshua which originated at the time of Ezra and Nehemiah. (Jesus was even used for the name Hoshea in the Septuagint in one of the three places where it referred to Joshua son of Nun--in the other two places it was transliterated Ause.) Clement of Alexandria and St. Cyril of Jerusalem viewed the Greek form itself to be the original name of Jesus.

There are significant phonetic difficulties in seeing the epithet son of Pandera as a corruption of parthenos, and this interpretation ignores the understandable meaning of "betrayer" as explained above. Moreover, Jesus was not commonly referred to as son of the Virgin making an intentional play on such an expression very unlikely. Regarding the names of the disciples, the accepted origins of Thaddaeus is Thaddai, Todah, and the identification of John and Andrew with Buni and Netzer is not considered tenable by linguists.

R. Travers Herford and others caution that not all mentions of Yeshu refer to the Christian Jesus. Rabbi David Rosen, American Jewish Committee director of interreligious affairs, and Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz, author of a prominent new Talmud commentary, hold that most or all mentions of Yeshu are probably not to the Christian Jesus. Furthermore, many critical historical scholars hold that for a variety of reasons, early Christianity was simply one of many factions competing with rabbinical Judaism, and the early sages of the Talmud paid no special attention to Jesus or Christianity.