Question

Peace be upon you,
The Netziv, in his commentary on Song of Songs (3:6), Rinah Shel Torah, writes as follows:
“Who is this coming up from the wilderness like pillars of smoke?” Since the poet had said that the watchmen found her—that is, the great Torah scholars, who would go about the city occupied with acts of kindness—Solomon comes in the song as if wondering about this phenomenon: how could Torah scholars, great in Torah, detach themselves from their learning and engage in acts of kindness? And he says, “Who is this?”—the entire Israelite nation.
“Coming up from the wilderness”—for there almost all of them were Torah students, as taught many times in the Mekhilta: “The Torah was given only to eaters of the manna.” And they were “like pillars of smoke,” for in truth that whole generation was distinguished by love of God, as it is written, “And you who cleave to the Lord your God,” etc. … And it is known that love is compared to fire, as it is written, “Many waters cannot quench love” (below 8:7). And just as fire catching onto wet wood sends up pillars of smoke because the water in that wood resists the nature of the fire, so too one who is seized by the fire of love of God through diligent Torah study, yet is drawn after things that interfere with that cleaving, is compared to pillars of smoke.
And he says, “perfumed with myrrh and frankincense,” etc. We have already written in section 1, verse 3, and elsewhere, that acts of kindness are compared to spices. Now just as there are many kinds of spices—some give fragrance without any action or exertion, and some do not give fragrance except after pounding or burning; some are easily obtained, like frankincense that is cast up from the sea, and some do not come to a person except with great effort, like myrrh gathered from among thorns—so too there are many forms of acts of kindness. This is compared to myrrh, that to frankincense, and that to merchant’s powder. Since the evil inclination has no power to entice a Torah scholar to neglect words of Torah for mundane matters, it therefore entices them to occupy themselves with all forms of acts of kindness. And the poet speaks as if astonished about one who comes up from the wilderness and ought to be held fast in love of God through Torah, yet is like pillars of smoke because of much involvement in acts of kindness. And in truth this too is not proper, for Torah study is greater than acts of kindness, and it can be done by others… Therefore the evil inclination exerts all its strength to bring matters of acts of kindness before those engaged in Torah, if only they will be idle from words of Torah. And from this we learn how great the power of Torah is, and how greatly an elevated person must strengthen himself so as not to be seduced by the counsel of the evil inclination.”
At the beginning of his remarks it sounds as though the Torah scholar is really uprooting his learning for the sake of kindness, and therefore he should continue with Torah. But from the end of his remarks, where he writes that it can be done by others, it sounds like he should not even jump up to do an act of kindness, but rather continue learning.
I have difficulty with his words, both on the basic level—that a Torah scholar should not engage in kindness—and because of many sources in the Talmud where Torah and kindness are a pair, and Torah without kindness is not Torah.
Abaye lived a long life because he was involved in kindness. Clearly this refers to kindness that could have been done by others, because if not, how could Rava have done less? After all, this is like any commandment: if it cannot be done by others, one interrupts his learning for it.
If the Rabbi has an answer to the Netziv’s words, I would be glad.
Thank you,