When Moshe Rabbeinu raised his hands, Klal Yisrael became stronger. However, his hands were becoming heavy. To prevent his hands from descending, Aharon and Chur placed a stone beneath him, so that he could sit, and they supported his hands – one on each side. Horav Moshe Shternbuch, Shlita, observes that Moshe’s two supporters in the war against the evil Amalek were two individuals – his brother, Aharon, and his nephew, Chur, who had disparate natures and approaches toward serving Hashem. Aharon was the consummate ohaiv shalom, v’rodef shalom, loved peace and pursued peace. He was a pacifist who sought every and any avenue to express his love for all Jews – regardless of their religious leanings. Chur, on the other hand, was a zealot, who stood up to the rabble-rousers who created the Golden Calf. Unfortunately, he paid the ultimate price for his brave stand. On the surface, one might think that these two approaches are incongruous to one another. This, says the Rav, is untrue. Together, they equally supported Moshe. The war against Amalek, who is synonymous with evil, requires that one love all Jews, while simultaneously detesting the evil doers. The two go hand-in-hand, because the hatred one harbors for evil must be an outgrowth of his love for Klal Yisrael.
The zealot who acts out of hatred demonstrates his negative character traits. The true kanai, zealot, loves all Jews. Thus, he despises the evil that assaults our ability to live as Torah Jews. Some individuals love a good fight and seek every opportunity to protest, undermine, battle with those who attack the Torah camp. Their motives are not rooted in Torah and love of Hashem and Klal Yisrael. They are troublemakers who seek to mitigate their abysmal character traits.
The Chasam Sofer, zl, who was the leader of Hungarian Jewry, took an uncompromising, strong stand against the secularists who sought to reform and denigrate Torah Judaism. He was an ardent believer in Austritt (German secession, in which the Orthodox community seceded from the secular leadership and their minions). Indeed, the maskillim, “enlightened” Jews, who had relieved themselves of any commitment to Torah, accused him of lacking ahavas Yisrael. Where was his love for the Jewish People? How could he initiate divisiveness within the Jewish community? His response was: On the contrary, his motivation was deeply-rooted in his abiding love of the Jewish People, and he sought to elevate the concept of peace among them. To achieve this courageous goal, it was crucial that they separate from those who sought to harm them by creating a rift between the Jewish People and Hashem.
Horav Chaim Soloveitchik, zl, was a legendary baal chesed, pursuing acts of lovingkindness and reaching out to anyone who was a victim of adversity – regardless of background and religious leanings. His home was a makom hefker, an ownerless place, which was open to anyone who chose to make it his domicile. Nonetheless, he fought valiantly against those who would make an incursion into the spiritual integrity of our people.
The Satmar Rebbe, zl, Horav Yoel Teitelbaum, was a giant among giants. He would not give in one iota to compromise on any Jewish tradition. Those who wanted to make changes regarding Jewish observance – or who wanted to partner with the secular streams – heard his vehement negative response. He was acutely aware of the tragic consequences that would arise from such a decision. Despite his outspoken, sharp expressions, the Rebbe had a warm and merciful heart. He loved each and every Jew and helped everyone who was in need. He never kept charitable money in his house overnight, distributing it almost as soon as he received it. When he ran out of money, he would borrow in order to continue providing assistance. Although some Torah scholars did not share his views, he showed respect to everyone in deference to their Torah scholarship. Horav Amram Blau, zl, of Yerushalayim epitomized the concept of kanai, zealot; yet, even when he witnessed a pirtzah, incursion, concerning the modesty of dress required of a Jewish woman, he would not publicly chasten her. Kana’us was important, but not shaming a fellow Jew was even more important. He demonstrated that kana’us must be the corollary of ahavas Yisrael. Otherwise, it is not true kana’us.
