Is the "Baby Groot" figurine, which has a head and body with tree details and veins, and a ring at the top of its head, considered among the prohibited animated beings, or is it considered a tree and thus among the non-animated beings?

Depicting trees in human form is not without problems and doubts, especially if it is three-dimensional. This is a point of contention among jurists.

Al-Mawardi said: There is no difference in the prohibition of images of animate beings, whether they are beautiful or ugly, large or small, if they are images of an animal that has been seen. As for the image of an animal that has not been seen before (such as a bird with a human face), there are two views regarding its prohibition:

The first: It is forbidden, and in fact, it is more severely forbidden. The second: It is not forbidden, and this is the view of Abu Hamid al-Marwazi.

The prohibition of images of animate beings that have no real-world counterpart has previously been favored. The matter becomes less severe if the features are unclear and only visible from close up.