In Klai Ilan there is no prohibition even to eat it and to look at the picture, and it is true that the Chazoa preferred not to eat it, and this is supported by the Ramban on the Torah that the hybrid is an abominable thing before God, but in fact it is allowed to eat it, and so they did with all kinds of fruits that are hybrid like Kiwi and apricot and no one refrained from eating them.
But the vineyards, which are prohibited for pleasure, are included in the general discussion of whether it is permissible to take and see pictures of prohibitions of pleasure, such as pictures of Hanukkah candles in the first half hour, as well as a picture of wine produced by a Gentile whose sin is wine, as well as a picture of the place of the temple and even the Western Wall that is mentioned in the inscriptions And in the shekels of what is done as the Toss in Kiddoshin, in fact in all of this we enter into this matter.
And as I brought up in the Shu'at with Segulah C. Ez, that there is a dispute between the Garash and Azner and the Garhak, regarding the first half hour of Hanukkah candles.
And it seems that Sugyen Dalma and the prevailing custom are not to make it worse at all.
And on the other hand, since it has already been photographed, it should not be made worse at all, since pleasure is not prohibited, such as someone who tells his friend that so-and-so is wrong, drank wine and he has any pleasure from it, it is not prohibited, and Afi' Damri' in Gm' in Holin and in Gitin, in Davmashtarshi Lia, considers pleasure but does not see a picture that only He reveals to him that there was wine Nesech, which is not to be felt at all, but to take a picture that at the time enjoyed looking at the body of the prohibition in such a way that it is obvious that he enjoyed it, it is like a sound and a sight and a smell that is forbidden to spurn like Damari' on Passovers, and here it is neither possible nor intentional since the goal here is to enjoy the body of the prohibition, and at least because What is done by the device is the decision of the Chazoa that a device is considered an act by the device as Mahrisha Dharamban taught, therefore a soulful person will be strict not to take pictures and if there is a picture that has been taken there is no need to be afraid.
And regarding the viewing of the picture, it should be added that you should not become more serious when viewing the picture of Aisanari Ha'anha (which is the painting of the Isv'an in Alma by a machine), more than substitutes for the prohibitions of pleasure and increases the prohibitions of pleasure in places that were not decreed, cf.
And likewise, only the ZA photographer and other prohibited photographers were banned, but the one who took a photo of wine, and by this we mean a YAN other than his employee, we have not heard that the photographer would be banned by this, even though there is some party here that caused pleasure that was turned around by the ISAAN.
And AAG Dkaima Len regarding a Fat that was baked in the trees of a ban, which is forbidden because there is praise of trees in the Fat, mm there is a realistic pleasure that is visible to the eye through an action that the trees of the ban worked, but here the image is only a copy of a situation that may have been made in the ban of this copying, But there is no way to prohibit such a thing.
However, regarding photos taken on Shabbat, the Gersha and the Grisha ordered that they are prohibited after Shabbat, and so on in a second thread regarding a recording that was recorded on Shabbat, but it is possible that the Shabbat deed should be divided into degbi. that the prohibition of pleasure is the object and not the pleasure of a prohibited act, Dadarba from a carn and kiddish in their blood is sanctified, and the second thread wrote that the prohibition of the act of Shabbat is not a fence of the prohibition of pleasure but a prohibition of use and apparently is not agreed upon by the OT SKD), and I.A. in this.
מק"ט התשובה הוא: 4015