168 —שלבי הצמיחה, בחירה חפשית, וניצוצות אלוקיים בבריאה

Shalom u'Vrachah! I was delighted to read your essay and to see that you are a thinker who delves into such deep matters and engages with them with such strong intellectual insight. My thanks for presenting your idea to me and requesting my opinion on all this. Due to many preoccupations connected with preparations for the Melamedim LeChelek (teachers' program) for the upcoming study period, my response has been delayed for now, and I ask your forgiveness.

The matters are extremely deep, and human language is inadequate to precisely and fully express these concepts; therefore, several details remain unclear and leave room for doubts. Without getting involved in the particulars of your essay's topics, I will address here some general lines within it. After presenting the conclusion of your essay, I will comment on what seems appropriate.

Your idea: Every single thing first exists in a "seed" state. Then it develops and grows until it reaches its perfection—according to its current level. But this perfection is itself only a "seed" (perhaps better termed "introduction and preparation" instead of "seed") relative to the level it must ascend to next. Thus it rises from level to level, uniting with other entities (which have also passed through a similar order of development), and their participation forms a "seed" (form) from which a composite entity emerges. This composite entity serves as a "seed" for an even more developed entity, and so forth.

At a certain stage of development within this order of levels stands man. Here appears a new power—spirituality and free choice—to go and act according to the laws of "growth," or to defy them.

There are several unclear points in your essay's presentation:

a) Since free choice exists only in man while everything else operates according to natural laws of development and growth, it follows that man's free choice makes him inferior compared to all other existents: since all others move only forward, whereas man can sometimes regress by his power of choice.

b) You did not clarify what exactly is the "thing" that develops and grows. For example: one plants a seed; this seed itself grows into a tree bearing sour or small apples. But from this tree's seed grows another tree whose apples are sweeter or larger. It cannot be said that the first seed developed into a better seed since the first seed no longer exists. Nor can one say that the species of apple trees developed—since "species" is not an actual entity but only an abstract concept our intellect uses to categorize phenomena by various signs and rules. Is your intent that "nature" itself developed—that previously there existed only trees with sour fruit, but through improvement "nature" now produces trees with sweet fruit?

c) You did not clarify what is the criterion by which we know what constitutes development versus regression. For example: sweet apples compared to sour ones—this is not absolute development but only so from the perspective of human needs alone. Sharp vision is not necessarily an advantage or sign of development except for animals living where there is light who need their eyes; for animals in places without such conditions it may be a disadvantage since it serves no purpose and requires energy etc. It is known that horses living underground in English coal mines for many years have their vision weaken year by year; likewise some species of fish found in underground lakes or rivers have almost no sight at all or even lack eyes entirely.

More generally: A more developed and complex body—from our perspective—is considered higher on the ladder of improvement than a simple body (monkey or worm). But from the body's own perspective regarding its struggle for existence it may be otherwise: A simple body (worm) can withstand heat and cold; if cut into pieces each part lives independently; its nourishment is simple and readily available; it hardly ever gets sick etc.—none of which applies to highly complex bodies.

d) According to your scheme simple bodies first develop each on their own, then combine together—this being an ascent in each one's improvement—and become one composite body. Here arises the question: What or who is the great coordinator who initially leads each body along its developmental path so that later they complement each other? It makes sense when speaking about one body itself—that everything follows some inherent connection—but what connection exists between two separate bodies? One must conclude that this coordinating force is something external to both bodies, above them both, thus ruling over them and leading them toward a goal also outside both.

* * *

Which assumptions related to the above are based on Chassidus:

a) The Holy One blessed be He created the world and everything in it; within every single thing there is an Elokut spark which brings it into being and gives it life at every moment—and without this spark it would revert to nothingness—even though this spark is hidden rather than revealed (for example: there is no visible sign when someone dies; its existence is known only by logical necessity).

b) The more revealed and active this Divine spark becomes within something, the closer that thing comes—even openly—to its true state; thus it rises higher, develops further, becomes more complete.

c) G‑d is the source of life itself; therefore wherever vitality becomes more revealed—this marks ascent on the ladder of development. Thus overall: plant above mineral; animal above plant; human above animal.

d) The Creator alone possesses absolute freedom—for He created not just existence but also nature's laws themselves. Similarly—freedom and free choice—are found only in man; this serves as one proof that man stands above all other creations—in terms of development.

e) If through his actions by free choice man acts contrary to what should be—as mentioned above—that is: he increases concealment upon his own Divine spark or upon another thing's spark (for example through gluttony)—then not only does he fail to ascend on the ladder of development but he actually descends backward—and drags down with him (the food/drink consumed along with their Divine sparks)—thus adding destruction in creation. But if through his free choice he chooses good deeds—not only does he ascend as do all other creations when fulfilling their function—but he adds something uniquely his own by his good will since he was free in choosing—a new constructive element within creation—a matter akin to creation itself—as our Sages said (Bereishit Rabbah 68): Israel (Yaakov) creates worlds.

* * *

If you have any comments regarding these points I would be happy to hear from you—and at any time I am ready etc.—from my handwritten copy intended for translation into English for sending out.

Summary

The Rebbe explores philosophical questions about growth stages in creation, highlighting how Chassidus teaches every entity contains Divine sparks guiding its ascent. Human free choice uniquely enables either spiritual ascent or descent—empowering us with responsibility over creation’s destiny.