Is it an avierah to draw women with their breasts exposed? I have seen paintings by European artists that depict biblical women with their breasts exposed and wondered: if a Jew were to do this, would it be an avierah? And, no, I'm not talking about drawing a naked women who's in front of you, just about drawing/painting something with a women that has its breast exposed (with no woman in front or with you at all).

  • 3
    I don't know that female breasts always had the highly erotic associations they now have in Western culture. In some locales I suspect exposing your thigh would have been a much greater offense. – Double AA Jun 15 '16 at 20:28
  • 1
    @DoubleAA is it allowed to read Shema regarding a painting of biblical women with their breasts exposed? – kouty Jun 15 '16 at 21:48
  • 1
    I thiink that it is allowed, may be more. If a man is allowed to see his wife when she is not nidda, he can draw it. what is the problem. To draw following imagination may be a problem of venishmartem mikol davar ra. the question is good. – kouty Jun 15 '16 at 21:55
  • 1
    @AvishaiEliYahu read again "To draw..." – kouty Jun 15 '16 at 22:10
  • 2
    @Adám you just failed the rorchach:) – user6591 Sep 15 '16 at 0:22

It seems not a problem since many jewish books had that on the title page


so for a woman it should not be a problem (if it is not to be used for erotic proposes)
but for a man their might be a problem of pornography for himself even if it is not for erotic proposes of others

  • 3
    Many Jewish books were published by non-Jewish printers, and they may have inserted those publisher's pages into the front of the book against the Jewish author's volition. Are you aware of any books published by a Jewish publishing company with these drawings? – Chaim Jun 24 '16 at 15:28
  • No sources, the example of books you brought up does not imply it's allowed – Dan Weisberg Jun 6 '19 at 7:45
  • @Chaim the jews did not rip them out – hazoriz Jun 6 '19 at 9:12
  • Hazoriz The Maharal's works printed in his own lifetime had pictures with Moshe and Aharon. Moshe had literal horns, like a goat, in that picture. Does that mean Maharal believed that to be the case? – user6591 Jun 6 '19 at 9:30
  • @user6591 no, it only means jews owning that book did not have a problem with this representation of moshe – hazoriz Jun 6 '19 at 9:58

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .