Avodah Zarah 91
אמר לו ר"ע והלא כבר נאמר (דברים יב, ב) אבד תאבדון אם כן מה ת"ל ואבדתם את שמם מן המקום ההוא לכנות לה שם
R. Akiva said to him: But has it not been already stated, “You shall surely destroy?” If so, what does Scripture say, “And you shall destroy their name from that place?” That verse teaches that an idol must be renamed.
יכול לשבח לשבח ס"ד אלא יכול לא לשבח ולא לגנאי ת"ל (דברים ז, כו) שקץ תשקצנו ותעב תתעבנו כי חרם הוא
You might have thought [it should be renamed] for praise. For praise? Would you really think such a thing! Rather, you might have thought [that the renaming should be] neither for praise nor contempt; Scripture says, “You shall utterly detest it, and you shall utterly abhor it for it is proscribed” (Deuteronomy 7:26).
הא כיצד היו קורין אותה בית גליא קורין אותה בית כריא עין כל עין קוץ
How so? If they called it Bet Galya [house of revelation], call it Beth Karya [house of concealment]; if they called it En Kol [the all-seeing eye], call it En Koz [the eye of a thorn].
תני תנא קמיה דרב ששת העכו"ם העובדים את ההרים ואת הגבעות הן מותרין ועובדיהן בסייף ואת הזרעים ואת הירקות הן אסורין ועובדיהן בסייף
A tanna taught in the presence of R. Sheshet: If idolaters worship mountains and hills, they are permissible but the worshippers must be put to the sword; [if they worshipped] plants and vegetation, these are prohibited and the worshippers must be put to the sword.
ולוקמה באילן שנטעו מתחלה לכך ורבנן לא ס"ד דקתני דומיא דהר מה הר שלא נטעו מתחלה לכך אף האי נמי שלא נטעו מתחלה לכך
But let [R. Sheshet] apply [the statement reported by the tanna] to a tree which had been planted for idolatry at the outset and [make it agree with the view of] the rabbis! Do not even think this, for it taught [that the plants] were similar to the mountain: just as with a mountain it was not planted for idolatry at the outset, so with this also it was not planted for idolatry at the outset.
איתמר אבני הר שנדלדלו בני רבי חייא ורבי יוחנן חד אמר אסורות וחד אמר מותרות מ"ט דמ"ד מותרות כהר מה הר שאין בו תפיסת ידי אדם ומותר אף הני שאין בהן תפיסת ידי אדם ומותרין
It has been stated: If boulders become detached from a mountain: the sons of R. Hiyya and R. Yohanan [disagree]; one says that they are prohibited and the other that they are permitted. What is the reason for the one who says they are permitted? [The boulders are] like the mountain; just as the mountain is something on which no manual labor had been performed and is permitted, so these are things on which no manual labor had been performed and they are permitted.
וחזר הדין לא ראי זה כראי זה ולא ראי זה כראי זה הצד השוה שבהן שאין בהן תפיסת ידי אדם ומותר אף כל שאין בהן תפיסת ידי אדם ומותר
Therefore the logic returns, this one is not like this one, nor is it like this cone; their commonality is that they are not the products of manual labor and they are permitted. Consequently anything that is not the product of manual labor is permitted.
ומאן דאסר להכי כתיב שקץ תשקצנו ותעב תתעבנו דאע"ג דאתיא מדינא להיתרא לא תתיא
As for him who prohibits [the boulders], it is because it is written, “You shall utterly detest it and you shall utterly abhor it” although it is possible to reason to the conclusion that they are permitted, do not make that analogy
קא סלקא דעתך להשתחוות לה והשתחוה לה וקא מיבעיא ליה האי זקיפתה אי הוי מעשה אי לא הוי מעשה אבל לא זקף לא מיתסרא ש"מ בני ר' חייא דשרו
You should [currently] understand that he had the intention of worshipping it and did worship it; and the point of [Hizkiyah's] question is whether the setting up of the egg is to be considered an action or not. But if he had not set it up, it is not prohibited. Conclude from that that it was the sons of R. Hiyya who permitted [the use of the boulders]!
לא לעולם אימא לך בני רבי חייא דאסרי דהשתחוה לה אע"ג דלא זקפה אסורה והכא במאי עסקינן כגון שזקף ביצה להשתחוות לה ולא השתחוה לה
No; I can always say that it was the sons of R. Hiyya who prohibited their use, and that if the man worshipped [the egg], even though he had not set it up, it would be prohibited. And what are we dealing with here [in Hizkiyah’s question]? With a case where he set up an egg to worship but did not worship it.
ולמאן אי למאן דאמר עבודת כוכבים של ישראל אסורה מיד אסורה אי למאן דאמר עד שתיעבד הא לא פלחה
Now according to whom [is this question asked]? If according to him who sayst hat the idolatrous object of an Israelite is prohibited immediately, then it is prohibited; if according to him who says [that such an object is not prohibited] until it has been actually worshipped, behold the man has not worshipped it!
כי הא דאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל ישראל שזקף לבינה להשתחוות לה ובא עובד כוכבים והשתחוה לה אסורה וקא מיבעיא ליה לבינה הוא דמינכרא זקיפתה אבל ביצה לא או דלמא לא שנא תיקו:
and [his question was whether] this is like that which R. Judah said in the name of Shmuel: If an Israelite set up a brick to worship [but did not do so] and an idolater came and worshipped it, it is prohibited. And [Hizkiyah] asked the question: A brick [is prohibited] because its erection is noticeable, but an egg’s is not; or perhaps there is no difference? The question remains unanswered.