1) Definition and purpose

The “Tree of Life” is the symbolic map organized by the manifestation of the divine in ten sephiroth and 22 trails. It does not describe God in His essence (Ein Sof), but their modes of autodespliegue and relationship with the creation. Serves to:

• articulate theology (how the infinite is associated with the finite),
• guide ethics and devotion (imitatio Dei through the middot),
• structure contemplation and liturgy (kavanot, yijudim),
• offer a model of the human soul and the story (rupture–repair–restoration).

2) Sources of textual and historical evolution (synthesis)

• Late Antiquity / Early Middle Ages: Sefer Yetzirá (siglos VI–IX approx.) formula a cosmology of 10 sephiroth of “number” and 22 letters; there is still no “tree” diagramático as such.
• Sefer ha-Bahir (XII century): appear traits proto-sefiróticos and symbolic language that will influence the Zóhar.
• Tradition zohárica (s. XIII–XIV): the Zóhar (attributed to Shimʿon bar Yoḥai; composition medieval) describes ten sefirotthree columns (left, right, center), emanation and unification; enter the partzufim in embryonic form.
• Safed (s. XVI):
  • Moshe Cordovero (Remak), Pardés Rimonim: systematizes metaphysics sefirótica pre-luriánica, emphasis in the continuity of the divine light.
  • Isaac Luria (Ari), ʿEts Ḥayim (by Ḥayyim Vital): doctrine of the Tzimtzúm (contraction), Shevirat ha-Kelim (break of containers) and Tikun (repair), re-reading the tree as cosmic drama.
• Modern Age–Contemporary: diagrams Ilanot (multiple variants: Remak, Luria, Gaon of Vilna/GRA); reception hasidic; historical studies (Scholem, Idel, Wolfson).

3) Architecture Tree

3.1. The ten sefirot (up-down)

• Kéter (Crown): Will/root supra-cognitive; “no-head” of the tree.
• Jojmá (Wisdom): intuition seminal, “point” of lighting.
• Biná (Understanding): joint/discernment; “matrix” that develops the spark of Jojmá.
• Daʿat (Knowledge): (variable) are not always counted; it is link conscious/accession that integrates Jojmá-Biná.
• Ḥésed (Love/Grace): expansion, gift, kindness.
• Gevurah (Rigor/Justice): restriction, judgment, strength, limits.
• Tiféret (Beauty/Compassion): harmonization of Ḥésed and Gevurah; center-ethical teúrgico.
• To Netzaj (Victoria): persistence, strategy, projection active.
• Hod (Splendor): resonance, reflection, symbolic order.
• Yesod (Foundation): pipe, union, interface between the upper and the receptive.
• Maljut/Shechinah (Reign/Presence): receptacle/demonstration last; divine immanence in the world.

Axes/pillars:

• Right (expansion): Jojmá–Ḥésed–To Netzaj.
• Left (contraction): Biná–Gevurah–Hod.
• Central (balance): Kéter/Daʿat–Tiféret–Yesod–Maljut.

3.2. The 22 paths

Connect the sephiroth and correspond traditionally to 22 Hebrew letters (as suggested by Sefer Yetzirá). The exact allocation of letters/paths varies for school (Remak, Luria, GRA).

4) Three levels of the divine

• Ein Sof: the infinite, unknowable.
• Ohr Ein Sof (Infinite Light): irradiation unlimited.
• The Sephiroth: modes/attributes through which the light is contracts and ordering to enable the creation.

5) Doctrine luriánica (key)

• Tzimtzúm: “contraction” symbolic of the infinite light to open “space” ontological creation (not space; it is metaphor theological).
• Kav (beam): re-admission of light graduate.
• Adam Kadmon: available primary lights.
• Shevirat ha-Kelim: collapse of containers in worlds on high; sparks (nitzotzot) fall to lower levels.
• Tikun: repair through mitzvot, prayer with kavaná acts and ethical; raising sparks and join Partzufim.

6) Four worlds (ʿOlamot)

1. Atzilut (Emanation): unit sefirótica; divinity transparent.
2. Beriyá (Creation): great minds/archangels; beginning of " otherness."
3. Yetzirá (Training): structures emotional/angelológicas.
4. Asiyá (Action): material world/operating.
   The Tree is repeat analogically to in each world.

7) Partzufim (configurations, “face-person”)

Developments of the Zóhar and the school luriánica: Arij Anpín (macro-longánimo ≈ Kéter), Abba (Jojmá), Ima (Biná), Zeʿir Anpín (Ḥésed→Yesod built-in) and Nukvá/Maljut (Shechinah). Explain relational dynamics between sephiroth, liturgy, and history.

8) Ethics, soul and practice

• Imitatio Dei: to grow in life middot sefiróticas: to give (Ḥésed), justice (Gevurah), compassion (Tiféret), discipline (Yesod), humility/reception (Maljut).
• Human soul: microcosm of the Tree; levels néfesh–ruach–neshama (and, in some fonts, jayá–yejidá) are integrated with the worlds.
• Liturgy and mysticism: kavanot (intentions) and yijudim (unifications of names/sephiroth), especially in the tradition luriánica; the purpose is to join Zeʿir Anpín and Nukvá (restore Shechinah).
• Halachah and tikun: the enforcement specific vehicle repair cosmic (not only individual morality).

9) Variants diagrammatic (Ilanot)

Does not exist a single diagram canon. There are families:

• Remak: continuity of the light, balanced ternary.
• Luria: strong emphasis on dynamic (break–repair), articulated with Partzufim.
• GRA (Vilna Gaon): rereadings of the mapping letters-trails and the relationship with Sefer Yetzirá.
  The “Ilanot” historical show different topologies (position Daʿat, assignments, letters, the order of trails).

10) Correspondence traditional (with caution)

Literature kabbalistic associated sephiroth with divine names, attributes prophetic, patriarchs, members of the body, days and planets/stars in certain corpus. Warning methodological: the tables vary depending on the author and time; it should be not absolutize a unique set. By way of example classic (common use, not universal):

• Ḥésed ↔ Name The, figure of Abraham, right arm, love is expansive.
• Gevurah ↔ Elohim, figure of Isaac, left arm, trial/force.
• Tiféret ↔ YHVH (sometimes YHVH with vocalization compassionate), Jacob, torso, harmony/raḥamim.
• Maljut ↔ AdonaiDavid/divine presence, receptivity/word.
  Assignments planets (Jupiter-Ḥésed, Mars-Gevurah, etc) appear in sources tardomedievales and renaissance; are not uniform in the jewish tradition.

11) Readings of the theological key

• Transcendence and immanence: the Tree prevents to identify God with the universe (pantheism) and, at the same time, allows talk about operational presence (Shechinah).
• Evil and din: the breakage and the “bark” (Qelipot) explain evil as distortion or excess of severity detached compassion. The tikun rebalances.
• Symbolic language: metaphors of light, vessels, unions bridal; should not be read as a physical literal.

12) Use contemporary and common misunderstandings

• The Tree no it is a “technology esoteric” disconnected from Torah and mitzvot in their classical sources; their deployment it is inherently textual, liturgical, and ethical.
• Syncretize (western occult) popularized diagrams but mixed correspondences are not jewish; it should be distinguish levels of study.

13) Bibliography minimum and sources

Primary/traditional

• Sefer Yetzirá (ed. and trads. critical number).
• Sefer ha-Bahir.
• Zóhar (ed. Daniel Matt, The Zohar: Pritzker Edition; critical apparatus reliable).
• Moshe Cordovero, Pardés Rimonim.
• Ḥayyim Vital (school of the Ari), ʿEts Ḥayim, Shaʿar ha-Kavanot.
• Editions Ilanot (e.g., facsimiles published by the Ilanot Project, Univ. Bar-Ilan).

Secondary academic (rigorous)

• Gershom Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism; On the Kabbalah and its Symbolism.
• Moshe Idel, Kabbalah: New Perspectives; Absorbing Perfections.
• Elliot R. Wolfson, Language, Eros, Being; Through a Speculum That Shines.
• Adam Afterman, And They Shall Be One Flesh (on yijud).
• Boaz Huss, articles on the sociology of the Cabal contemporary.
• The Ilanot Project (Bar-Ilan): academic catalog of old trees.

14) Annex: summary of operational (study and practice)

1. Line study: Sefer Yetzirá → Bahir → Zóhar → Remak → Ari/Vital.
2. Conceptual map: Ein Sof → Tzimtzúm → Kav → Adam Kadmon → Partzufim → Shevirá → Tikun.
3. Work ethic-devotional: refine middot (Ḥésed↔give, Gevurah↔discipline, Tiféret↔compassion, etc) and pray with kavaná aware of the unit between the pillars.
4. Critical criteria: distinguish variants (Remak/Luria/GRA), not to establish correspondences only without a source, and to avoid reading literalists of symbolism.