I understand the Ultra-Orthodox Jews will not have paintings of people in their homes, for one, as only God can create Man. Likewise, a doll’s face would have to be damaged in some way to show it is NOT an image of mankind. Yet, surely these images could NEVER be mistaken for the real “Mc-Oy”! 
But, seriously…do these orthodox Jews allow photographs of people (family, loved ones)? Or, is that equally forbidden? - Jinx
There are a few Orthodox Rabbis who prohibited photographs, however, they are in the extreme minority…most great Orthodox Rabbis since the dawn of photography have had their pictures taken and circulated without protest.
Dolls are different, though. It’s forbidden to make a lifelike replica of a human being, it’s a “graven image” and as such is considered a step toward idolatry. Most dolls (e.g., Cabbage Patch Kids) would not require being damaged in order for a Jewish family to own it, but extremely lifelike ones would…you’d have to cut off an ear or something similar.
Wow. No kidding…
I’m not trying to be a jerk here, but what about plastic action figures (since they are usually based on human-looking subjects from movies, TV, or comic books)?
Big Bad Voodoo Lou I don’t have the answer to your question. However, as a Jew let me assure that there is nothing remotely jerkish about your question. Part of the Passover service is the parable of the four sons. One is the wise son. We know he is wise because he says “I do not know what these symbols and practices mean. Can you tell me?”
CMKeller said “lifelike” deciding what exactly that means is the thing that Talmudic discussions are all about.
Is an action figure lifelike even if it bears no resemblance to the actor it is supposed to represent?
While Buffy The Vampire slayer figures are lifelike, what about those portraying Spike, Angel, Dru et in ‘vamped out’ mode with fangs, red eyes, and a bestial face?
Ozzy Ozbourne has some lifelike action figures. But, what about the Bark At The Moon figure depicting Ozzy as a werewolf?
What about a lifesize, totally anatomically correct mannequin used to teach anatomy? Is it still lifelike even if the face is utterly generic?
Interesting. Does it extend to print/TV? What about drawings that are completely lifelike (the Mona Lisa?), or animation, or the latest computer games that are getting extremely lifelike?
Post Involves Some WAG, AFAIK- There is no ban on television. The same reasoning that allows photographs allows moving pictures. Print reproductions of photographs are acceptable. Reprints of paintings are unnacceptable, as are the original paintings. Some Orthodox Jews ban drawing and painting entirely. I’ve never read Chaim Potok’s My Name Is Aher Lev, but IIRC the protagonist is a gifted artist forbidden by his father and his people from painting or drawing.
The Mona Lisa is flat instead of three dimensional. Other than that, it doesn’t significantly differ. You’d have to cut off an ear or something similar.
OK, so live-action TV is to photos as Ultrarealistic Cartoons are to drawings. So are ultrarealistic cartoons (on TV or video games) allowed?
I don’t know. I need to keep searching the we for decisions on these things.
The ultra-Orthodox sects that have such very stringent rules concerning such things as dolls and media outlets don’t permit such things anyway. I live close to a sect called the Satmar Hasidic Jews. While it is impossible to avoid all contact with the outside world, to the most extreme extent possible there are no outside influences.
That means, no mainstream media. No television showing broadcasts. ( DVD players and t.v. sets are a separate issue, as long as programming is permitted).
Cabbage Patch Dolls wouldn’t have wound up in anyone’s Hannukah gift boxes, trust me. ;j
Doc Cathode, that is my favorite book. The point is not painting or drawing, it is what Asher Lev paints and draws. His family are not quite Ultra-Orthodox in the same vein as Satmar or other Hasidic sects. ( or, so it seems )
Needless to say, if one reads the book, by the end one sees what it is in his art that so upsets the Hasidic community… :eek:
That’s the only book that makes me cry every single time I read it.
Cartooniverse
That would make it The Mona Lisa by Vincent Van Gogh, wouldn’t it?
From this, we can gather that the purpose of severing an ear is not defacement, but to render the idol broken. However, this only works if you own the object in question. If you go to India and start tearing arms of idols, not only have you been very rude, you haven’t changed them from idols.
http://www.come-and-hear.com/zarah/zarah_52.html
Note- After a quick skim of the site it seems acceptable (though I strongly prefer that the talmud is always presented in the original Hebrew along with the translation). But, it may endorse positions I disagree with, or make factual errors.
One should also note that, for Conservative and Reform Jews, pictures or dolls do not pose any problems whatsoever.