Before the inclusion of Da'at as a quasi-Sefirah in later Kabbalistic diagrams (post-15th century), early Tree of Life diagrams from the late 13th to early 14th centuries were simpler and focused exclusively on the ten Sefirot (Keter, Chokmah, Binah, Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod, Malkhut). These diagrams, emerging primarily in Spanish and Provençal Kabbalistic circles, were among the first attempts to visually represent the Sefirot’s interconnections as a structured system. Below, I describe their appearance and characteristics based on historical evidence, keeping the response concise and focused on the pre-Da'at period (c. 1280–1400).

### Characteristics of Early Tree of Life Diagrams (Pre-Da'at) 1. **Basic Structure**: - **Ten Nodes**: The diagrams depicted the ten Sefirot as circles, ovals, or occasionally squares, arranged in a hierarchical pattern. The layout typically followed a vertical or triangular structure, foreshadowing the later three-pillar format (right: mercy, left: severity, center: balance). - **No Da'at**: Da'at was not included as a node or implied position, as it was understood theologically as an emergent state (a synthesis of Chokmah and Binah) rather than a distinct Sefirah. - **Linear or Tree-Like Flow**: The Sefirot were connected by lines or channels (*tzinnorot*), representing the flow of divine emanation from Keter (Crown, at the top) to Malkhut (Kingdom, at the bottom). Early diagrams often resembled a ladder, a single column, or a branching tree (*ilan*), hence the term *Ilanot* (trees) used for these manuscripts. 2. **Common Configurations**: - **Vertical Column**: Some of the earliest diagrams, like those in Spanish Kabbalistic manuscripts (c. 1280s), arranged the Sefirot in a single vertical line: Keter at the top, followed by Chokmah, Binah, Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod, and Malkhut. This linear form emphasized the sequential emanation of divine attributes. - **Triangular or Proto-Three-Pillar Layout**: By the early 14th century, diagrams began to adopt a more triangular or proto-tree structure, grouping the Sefirot into triads. For example, Chokmah and Binah were often placed side by side below Keter, forming an upper triangle, with Chesed and Gevurah forming a middle tier, and so on. This hinted at the later three-pillar system but was less standardized. - **Circular or Wheel-Like Variants**: Some manuscripts, such as a 1284 Spanish diagram, arranged the Sefirot in concentric circles or a wheel-like pattern, with Keter at the center and other Sefirot radiating outward. These were less common but reflect experimentation with visual forms. 3. **Visual Style**: - **Minimalist Design**: Early diagrams were hand-drawn in Hebrew manuscripts, often in black ink on parchment, with simple geometric shapes (circles or ovals) for Sefirot. Labels in Hebrew identified each Sefirah, sometimes with brief annotations from texts like the *Sefer ha-Bahir* or *Zohar*. - **No Paths as Letters**: Unlike later diagrams (post-16th century), which incorporated 22 paths corresponding to the Hebrew letters, early diagrams had fewer or no explicit paths. Connections were implied or drawn as straight lines without letter associations. - **Symbolic Elements**: Some diagrams included metaphors like branches, roots, or a tree trunk, reflecting the "Tree of Life" (*Etz Chaim*) imagery. Others used architectural motifs, like columns or gates, inspired by texts like Joseph Gikatilla’s *Sha'arei Orah* (c. 1290). 4. **Examples from Manuscripts**: - **"Tree of Wisdom" (*Ilan Chochmah*, c. 1280–1300)**: Found in Spanish Kabbalistic manuscripts, this diagram showed the ten Sefirot as circles connected by lines, often in a single column or a loose triangular arrangement. It lacked Da'at and focused on the emanative hierarchy. - **Catalonian Manuscripts (c. 1300)**: Some diagrams from the Provençal-Catalonian school (e.g., linked to Rabbi Isaac the Blind’s followers) depicted the Sefirot as a branching structure, with Keter as the root and Malkhut as the base, but without a fixed three-pillar grid. - **Zoharic Influence**: While the *Zohar* (c. 1280–1290) doesn’t include diagrams, its descriptions of the Sefirot as lights or vessels influenced early visual forms, which prioritized the ten emanations without Da'at. ### Context and Limitations - **Purpose**: These diagrams served as meditative or teaching aids for Kabbalists, illustrating the divine structure of creation. They were not mass-produced but circulated among small, scholarly circles in medieval Jewish communities. - **Variability**: There was no single "standard" diagram in this period. Scribes and Kabbalists experimented with layouts, reflecting local interpretations of texts like the *Zohar* or *Sefer Yetzirah*. The three-pillar Tree of Life we recognize today (popularized in the 16th century, e.g., in Reuchlin’s 1516 *Porta Lucis*) was still evolving. - **Absence of Da'at**: Since Da'at was a theological concept (knowledge as unity of Chokmah and Binah) rather than a structural Sefirah, it was not depicted in these early diagrams. Its later inclusion (16th century, especially in Lurianic Kabbalah) added complexity, but pre-1400 diagrams strictly adhered to the ten-Sefirot model. ### Comparison to Later Diagrams Unlike the later, more elaborate Tree of Life (post-1500s) with Da'at as a hidden node, 22 lettered paths, and a rigid three-pillar structure, early diagrams were simpler, less standardized, and focused on the ten Sefirot as a direct emanative sequence. They lacked the mystical complexity of Lurianic Kabbalah or the esoteric embellishments of Christian and Hermetic Qabalah. For visual references, surviving *Ilanot* manuscripts (e.g., in the Bodleian Library or Jewish Theological Seminary collections) show these early forms, though access may require academic resources. Gershom Scholem’s *Kabbalah* or J.H. Chajes’ work on *Ilanot* provide scholarly context. If you’d like, I can search for specific manuscript images or generate a simplified sketch of an early diagram for clarity—let me know!