Avodah Zarah, Chapter 3, Mishnah 4. Until now we have dealt with the prohibition of deriving benefit from idolatry, from anything that accompanies it, adorns it, or was offered to it. Our Mishnah brings a famous story that illuminates a number of these details and teaches how these matters work in practice.
"Sha'al Proklos ben Plosfos es Rabban Gamliel be'Akko, shehayah rochetz bamerchatz shel Afroditi" - Proklos ben Plosfos asked Rabban Gamliel in Akko, while he was bathing in the bathhouse of Aphrodite:
Proklos ben Plosfos was a priest who served idolatry, and the Gemara adds that he was also a hegemon, that is, a man holding governmental authority in Akko. In the bathhouse where Rabban Gamliel bathed there stood a statue of the Greek goddess Aphrodite (the Roman Venus), and for this reason the place was known as "the bathhouse of Aphrodite." Rabban Gamliel entered the bathhouse, and the priest chased after him in order to challenge him: how can it be that you are bathing here?
"Amar lo: kasuv beSoraschem 'velo yidbak beyadcha me'umah min hacherem', mipnei mah atah rochetz bamerchatz shel Afroditi?" - He said to him: it is written in your Torah, "and nothing of the banned property shall cling to your hand"; why then are you bathing in the bathhouse of Aphrodite? This verse has already been mentioned many times in our chapter, and it is one of the two verses from which we learn that anything connected to idolatry is forbidden to benefit from. Its plain meaning is that not even the smallest amount of the banned property should cling to your hand, and it was stated regarding a city that was led astray after idolatry. The priest therefore argues: how is it permitted for you to sit and bathe in a bathhouse connected to idolatry?
"Amar lo: ein meshivin bamerchatz" - He said to him: we do not answer in a bathhouse.
At first Rabban Gamliel answers that there is no place to discuss the question inside the bathhouse, since one may not speak words of Torah in such a place.
To clarify the matter: a bathhouse had three separate areas:
The outer area - where people are dressed.
The middle area - where people undress.
The inner area - where everyone is undressed, bathing and relieving themselves.
The law is that in the outer area one may speak words of Torah, while in the inner area it is forbidden. The source of the prohibition lies in the two halves of a single verse:
"Lo yera'eh becha ervas davar" - a prohibition against speaking words of Torah in the presence of nakedness, even when a person speaks in the presence of another who is undressed, and even when he himself is undressed.
"Vehayah machanecha kadosh" - a prohibition against speaking in the presence of filth, urine, and foul-smelling things.
This restriction limits speech alone, and not thinking about words of Torah. However, the inner room of the bathhouse, which by its very nature is designated for nakedness, is more severe, and even thinking about words of Torah is forbidden there. Therefore even saying "I cannot answer you here" is forbidden, since it involves thinking about the reason for which one refrains from discussing the matter.
We are forced to say, then, that the priest asked Rabban Gamliel while he was sitting in the innermost part of the bathhouse, and Rabban Gamliel did not answer him at all. Only when he withdrew to the dressing room did he tell him that there was no place to discuss it there, but rather he should wait until they went outside. Why did he bother to answer him at all? For one of two reasons:
So that the priest should not think that he had no answer.
Out of fear of the priest, who was the governor over him, and danger was involved.
Once he had left the dressing room entirely, and reached a place where it is permitted to speak words of Torah, Rabban Gamliel gave him three reasons for the leniency.
The first reason: "Ani lo basi bigvulah, hi ba'ah bigvuli" - "I did not come into her domain, she came into mine":
The bathhouse preceded the statue of Aphrodite - it was not Rabban Gamliel who entered her domain, but she who entered his. This is a public bathhouse, built with tax money, and the public has the right to use it, and idolatry has no power to forbid something in which a person already holds rights. The matter is somewhat similar to the case of a person who bows down to his friend's cow: the cow is not forbidden to its owner, since he has no power to forbid what is not his. So too the statue of Aphrodite: even if they worshipped it, it has no power to forbid to the public a bathhouse that is public property.
The second reason: "Ein omrim na'aseh merchatz l'Afroditi noy, ela omrim na'aseh Afroditi noy la'merchatz" - "People do not say: let us make the bathhouse an adornment for Aphrodite, but rather: let us make Aphrodite an adornment for the bathhouse":
Even if we assume that the statue came first and the bathhouse was built around it, no one says: how shall we adorn the idol Aphrodite? Let us build her a bathhouse. Rather people say: we have a bathhouse, let us beautify and adorn it and place a statue of Aphrodite in it. The question is what is primary and what is secondary: the bathhouse is the primary thing, and the statue is nothing more than a decorative element within it. For this reason it is neither idolatry nor an adornment subordinate to idolatry, and therefore it is permitted.
The third reason: "Davar acher, im nosein lecha mamon harbeh i atah nichnas la'avodah zarah shelcha arom u'ba'al keri u'mashtin lefaneha" - "Another matter: even if you were given a great deal of money, you would not enter your own place of idolatry naked, or impure, or urinating before it":
Not even for a great deal of money would you bring your idol into a place where people are naked, impure and urinating before it. "V'zu omedes al pi ha'biv, v'chol ha'am mashtin lefanav" - this statue stands right over the drainage channel, and all the people urinate before it. Clearly, then, it is not treated as an object of reverence, but merely as a decorative item. And even if it were an idol, people do not treat it in the manner of a god: urinating before it is not the way Aphrodite is worshipped, and this removes it from the category of an idol and leaves it a mere statue.
As proof, Rabban Gamliel cites the wording of the verse: "Lo ne'emar ela 'Eloheihem'" - the verse says only "their gods." The verse in Devarim (chapter 7, verse 25) states: "The graven images of their gods you shall burn in fire" - the prohibition therefore applies specifically to something that is treated in the manner of a god:
"Es shenoheg bo mishum eloha - assur" - something that is treated as a god is forbidden to derive benefit from.
"V'es she'eino noheg bo mishum eloha - mutar" - a statue that is not treated in the manner of a god, as in our case, where the people urinate before it, is permitted to derive benefit from.
In practical halachah: These principles were accepted as halachah, although today they have little practical application, since the world is not engaged in idolatry as it was in the past. More relevant in our times is the additional law that emerged from the Mishnah: the prohibition against saying words of Torah in a place that is not holy - such as a public shower, a bathroom, and any place designated for nakedness, whether people are meant to be naked there or are in fact stripped of their clothing. In such places one may not say words of Torah, and in the more severe among them even thinking about them is forbidden.