charge of the one aspect of his children’s education, begun only once they
reached the age of five or six.
These two passages clearly address the responsibilities of fathers toward their
children once they reached the age of education. Another passage in Sefer
H·asidim discusses the proper attitude of fathers toward young children in the
context of a father who wants to do penance. The passage suggests that a man
who does true penance does not tend to his children, but rather lets his wife
take care of them; if he feels deep sorrow whenever he hears them cry, but does
not approach them because he wishes to continue studying Torah, he will be
greatly rewarded.^47
All these sources distinguishing between spiritual love and natural love are
from Sefer H·asidim. As discussed in the introduction, H·asidei Ashkenaz have
often been portrayed as a distinct social group that held a more stringent and
ascetic worldview than other groups within the medieval Jewish community.^48
However, this distinction between fatherly spiritual love and motherly natural
love can be found in contemporary Christian sources as well. I would suggest
that the particularities of the genre of Sefer H·asidim enable us to hear ideas that
are muted in other genres. This conclusion is supported by other sources. Par-
allel Christian writings express the expectation that mothers would display nat-
ural affection for their children, while fathers were expected to foster spiritual
love.^49 Another commonly expressed theme, discussed at length by Shulamith
Shah·ar, was that women find it easier to feel close to their children during the
first years of their lives, while fathers find it easier to communicate with them
once they grow older. We saw this idea echoed in the first part of this chapter
when examining the reasoning for the wording of the fifth commandment.^50
Hence, this division between “natural” love and spiritual love was a feature of
medieval life, and was not merely characteristic of Sefer H·asidimand its milieu.
Although the medieval texts generally assume that women would have com-
passion as well the instinctual need to care for their children, they also discuss
cases in which women act in ways contrary to those expected of them. The de-
tails of these instances reaffirm the belief that a mother “naturally” cares for
her child. For example, when discussing the two women who came before
King Solomon, R. Judah the Pious remarks:
“Later, two women came to the king” (1 Kings 3:16). My father (R. Samuel the
Pious) asked, “What were these two women arguing about? When the first said,
‘The live one is my son’ (3:22), the other should say: ‘I am glad you are saying so.
Give him money and I will give him money, and he will inherit your money and
my money.’ Furthermore, she was mad (crazy), for she said, ‘Cut the live child’
(3:24), and even an infant could sense that she was not his mother.” Rather, this
is the way he (R. Samuel the Pious) interpreted the verse according to the simple
meaning of the text (p’shat). Both women were widows of a rich man, and it was