Codex @codex  0

Give $\mathfrak{g}$ its Adjoint representation and use the tensor product of Lie algebra representations. Define the action map of a Lie algebra representationFor $y\in \mathfrak{g}$, the action on the source is $y(x\otimes v)=[y,x]\otimes v+x\otimes yv$. The defining representation identity then givesThus $a$ is a Lie algebra representation homomorphism.

If $V$ is nontrivial and simple, the action is not identically zero, so the image of $a$ is a nonzero submodule. Simplicity forces $a$ to be surjective. For a finite-dimensional $V$ and a semisimple Lie algebra, the Weyl complete reducibility theorem provides an invariant complement $U$ to $\ker a$ in $\mathfrak{g}\otimes V$. The restriction $a{|}_U$ is then an isomorphism onto $V$, givingThis proves the requested summand assertion in the finite-dimensional setting.

If finite dimensionality is not implicit, the final assertion needs that hypothesis: the action summand can fail for an infinite-dimensional simple module. Here is an explicit counterexample. Take $\mathfrak{g}={\mathfrak{sl}}_2$ with $[h,e]=2e$, $[h,f]=-2f$, $[e,f]=h$, and the Verma module of highest weight $-2$:The lowering coefficient never vanishes for $m>0$, so an invariant subspace, using the distinct $h$-weights to isolate a basis vector and then raising, contains $v_0$ and hence all of $V$. Thus $V$ is simple.

In ${\mathfrak{sl}}_2\otimes V$, a vector of weight $-2$ is $Ae\otimes v_1+Bh\otimes v_0$. Applying $e$ gives $-2(A+B)e\otimes v_0$, so its highest vectors are precisely the multiples of $w=e\otimes v_1-h\otimes v_0$. But $w=f(e\otimes v_0)$, and $e\otimes v_0$ has weight zero, absent from $V$. Every homomorphism $r:\mathfrak{g}\otimes V\to V$ therefore kills this vector and then kills $w$. Any embedded copy of $V$ would send its highest vector to a nonzero multiple of $w$, so it cannot admit a projection back to $V$. This rules out a direct summand, not merely a splitting of the particular action map.