Depicting Biblical Characters

Is it OK to depict Biblical characters, including showing their face? Recently, I’ve been using AI to create illustrations for some of my posts / promotional matter on Twitter. Here is one such recent post, where I collected all the Matisse-style illustrations in one post. Depicted is supposed to be Yaakov Avinu, finally sleeping in after years of staying up all night in the yeshiva of Shem and Ever:

Matisse style images are not that realistic. Yes, there is a face, but nothing that gives us a real sense that this is the real person. Meanwhile, I’ve also been generating some Sora videos, in which we encounter realistic artificial people. And, since there is a mechanism by which I can carry an artificial character from one scene to another, we might think that this is an accurate depiction of Yosef HaTzadik.

So, are such depictions OK? In that earlier post, a commenter, fsy, noted:

I gather that you don’t believe in the idea which is popular in some circles today that there is something wrong with visually portraying the Avos or other Biblical personalities.

Have you ever looked into this subject?

I replied:

I haven't looked deeply into the subject. Growing up, there were Torah cards, where the faces of all the Biblical figures were blank. I thought that that was weird, and was something from the chareidi world. Other than that, there were coloring sheets, illustrations, etc. all with Biblical figures with faces. I know there's a general discussion about drawing faces in general, with legitimate basis for allowing it (as being a flat image). But I never looked specifically into this topic -- other than a two minute Google search once you asked. :)

and he replied:

I happen to live in the “Haredi World”, whatever that is, and while there are many issues I have with that “World”, this idea of not creating necessarily false images of our important personalities of the past resonates quite well with me.

What did you find in your search?

My final reply for the moment there was:

I’m not entirely knocking it as an invalid approach. If it resonates with you, then it resonates with you. It is just that I get the sense that it is more of an hashkafic, rather than halachic, position, and then there is more room for weighing the pros and cons of adopting specific approaches. And, while I see the merit of the position, it does not resonate to the same extent with me.

To an extent, I can understand not creating such images in the first place. But once one is creating such images to achieve an end, like helping people relate in some way to the Biblical stories and personalities, to then blank out the faces seemed jarring to me. This is the case for the occasional coloring pages I saw, as well as the Torah cards.

Here is a Facebook page of someone who has a complete set of Torah cards and makes videos. https://www.facebook.com/100058747256151/videos/147281656866484

Go to the 12 second mark in that video and see Yaakov, for instance. It just struck me as weird, as we try to depict them and then they have smooth faces.

Though not identical, the hashkafic disagreement might also align well with the criticism of Rav Steinsaltz for humanizing the avot which included character flaws. While we can point to some rishonim who viewed some actions of the avot as imperfect, this was not the derech of the chareidi and yeshivish world, and so the Edah Ḥaredit condemned him for it.

Maybe I’ll follow up about what I found in my recent, brief search.

To elaborate a little bit, my shallow understanding of the matter is that, where there have been halachic concerns about depicting humans, those concerns were about idolatry, rather than any impact on imagining the avot, and thus would apply to any human. And then, there are discussion about if it is a flat image, one that protrudes, or a 3D statue.

By Googling, I discovered that this had been asked on Mi Yodea, with an answer sourcing the concern to Rabbi Yitzchak Pinchas Goldwasser (who is a present-day rabbi, so presumably expressing an idea that was already pervasive in the chareidi community and would have earlier figures expressing it), but the same answerer also finding a source that would have the avot being depicted as a mitigating factor. Thus:

I found a reference to this practice--of not drawing the faces of the forefathers, specifically--mentioned here, Mimidbar Matanah by Rabbi Yitzchak Pinchas Goldwasser. He writes that we avoid drawing them in order to make sure nobody thinks that such great people could actually be captured by such mundane images.

However, I also found reference to the exact opposite: that it would be better to draw Avraham than anyone else. Rav Chaim Palagi (Lev Chaim 2:171) writes that although a protruding image of a person must normally be defaced in some way in order to be permissible, when it comes to an image of Avraham Avinu, this is not necessary, since Avraham is a symbol of monotheism and idol smashing, and so no one would suspect that the image is being used for avodah zarah purposes. (He was asked this by Count Abraham Camondo, who was given an engraving of Avraham Avinu by Moses Montefiore). This teshuvah of Rav Chaim Palagi is quoted approvingly by the Tzitz Eliezer, 9:44.

Elsewhere, there is an idea that visualizing people can help with study. Thus, in Eruvin:

אָמַר רַבִּי: הַאי דִּמְחַדַּדְנָא מֵחַבְרַאי דַּחֲזִיתֵיהּ לְרַבִּי מֵאִיר מֵאֲחוֹרֵיהּ, וְאִילּוּ חֲזִיתֵיהּ מִקַּמֵּיהּ הֲוָה מְחַדַּדְנָא טְפֵי — דִּכְתִיב: ״וְהָיוּ עֵינֶיךָ רוֹאוֹת אֶת מוֹרֶיךָ״.

The Gemara relates that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: The fact that I am more incisive than my colleagues is due to the fact that I saw Rabbi Meir from behind, i.e., I sat behind him when I was his student. Had I seen him from the front, I would be even more incisive, as it is written: “And your eyes shall see your teacher” (Isaiah 30:20). Seeing the face of one’s teacher increases one’s understanding and sharpens one’s mind.

Of course, this was seeing the person’s (Rabbi Meir’s) actual face. Even so, I think that different people process in different ways, and having a visual image to relate to can really help ground people as they study the Chumash. It might be helpful, and at the least, it is innocuous.

As for hashkafic grounds, this seems aligned with the question of whether the Biblical figures were perfect and operating on a level we could not possibly understand (the kol ha’omer X chata eino ela to’eh school) and those who did take them as human or making mistakes (see e.g. Ramban’s criticism of Yaakov in the introduction to Vayishlach).

At any rate, I decided to pose this halachic / hashkafic query to AI, to see how well it could do. First, I posed it to ChatGPT 5, but turning on Deep Research mode. In such a mode, instead of directly generating tokens for the answer, it plans what texts it should research, and iterates on these, crafting and following prompts. Then, it summarizes all of this into a final answer.

You can read the ChatGPT Deep Research answer in full here, but to summarize, it does not seem halachic, but more hashkafic. To quote excerpts:

Rabbi Dov Lior, a respected halachic authority in Israel, was asked about drawing the Avot and replied that while there is technically no strict prohibition, “it is preferable not to do so. If one does, it’s better not to draw their faces, which in that case is completely permitted” (Yeshiva.org.il, Ask the Rabbi)¹. This responsum encapsulates the cautious stance: you won’t find an outright issur (prohibition) in halakha against drawing Abraham or Moses, but ideally avoid it, and certainly avoid giving a detailed face

…

Rabbi Dov Lior, a respected halachic authority in Israel, was asked about drawing the Avot and replied that while there is technically no strict prohibition, “it is preferable not to do so. If one does, it’s better not to draw their faces, which in that case is completely permitted” (Yeshiva.org.il, Ask the Rabbi)¹. This responsum encapsulates the cautious stance: you won’t find an outright issur (prohibition) in halakha against drawing Abraham or Moses, but ideally avoid it, and certainly avoid giving a detailed face.

…

Counterbalancing the above, other rabbinic voices have supported or permitted visual portrayals of Biblical figures – especially when the intent is educational, inspirational, or to honor the legacy of those figures (and not to worship them). As noted, many classical authorities were lenient.

…

Beyond formal responsa, the common practice in much of the Orthodox world (especially Modern Orthodox and centrist Orthodox communities) accepts and even encourages visual depictions for the sake of learning. Orthodox kids grow up with illustrated Chumash story books, coloring books, and comics that show the Avot and Imahot (matriarchs), Moshe Rabbeinu, King David, and others in human form. Many of these books are published by religious presses. For example, ArtScroll’s children’s literature and the popular “Midrash Says” series include drawings of Biblical characters (typically with pleasant, modest facial depictions). In Jewish schools and youth groups, visual aids – from felt-board figures to posters of Biblical scenes – are routinely used to make the Torah narratives come alive.

The other AI I asked about this was Rav Dicta, which is an AI posek. You can see the (summarized) question, as well as the response, on their website, in English as well as in Rabbinic Hebrew. Rav Dicta was also meikil.

It did not address the hashafic concerns, but only the avoda zara related concerns. Thus, points it made included:

The Levush (Yoreh De'ah 141:4,7) added that images made for educational purposes are permitted even if they protrude, as we see that Rabban Gamliel had protruding images for learning purposes, and we are not concerned about prohibition in such cases.

…

Fourth, in our time there is no concern for idolatry in such cases, as written in Yechaveh Da’at.

Fifth, the drawings serve a clear educational purpose, which the Maharik wrote is reason for permissibility.

Therefore, it appears proper to draw biblical figures in an artistic style for the purpose of illustrating Torah portions, and according to most authorities there is no concern of prohibition. Nevertheless, it is appropriate to ensure that the drawings are not actually protruding but flat, and that it is clear they are for educational and illustrative purposes only, not for idolatry, God forbid.