Answer

I think not. Such a prohibition could apply only to Torah as an object, not to Torah as embodied in the person. See my article here on the site:
As I explained there, in principle the same would apply even to the Kuzari and Guide for the Perplexed—were it not for the verses quoted in them.
——————————————————————————————
Questioner:
One more small question regarding bringing secular books into the bathroom: is there a prohibition against bringing in secular books that contain a few divine names or a few verses, or can one say that the overwhelming majority determines it? Also, if it is unknown whether the secular book contains divine names or verses, is one obligated to check before bringing it into the bathroom?
——————————————————————————————
Rabbi:
I don’t think there is any difference between a few and many divine names. There is no need for the whole book to consist of divine names in order for there to be a prohibition against bringing it into the bathroom, so this has nothing to do with the rule that the majority counts as the whole, nor with following the majority. If anything, it would relate to the law of nullification, but here there is no mixture at all (if only because it is recognizable, and for other reasons as well), so there is no nullification.
There is an obligation to check if there is a reasonable concern about this. Obviously, you do not need to inspect a Kopiko book to see whether someone happened to insert a divine name there.
In any case, the very act of bringing it in is not so problematic, certainly if it has a cover (and some say even the binding counts as a cover). Reading it is more problematic. And with a secular book that happens to contain divine names incidentally, there is even more room to be lenient, because the book itself as an object is not sacred, and therefore the book can reasonably be considered a cover.
——————————————————————————————
Questioner:
So if I understood you correctly, one can be lenient about bringing a secular book into the bathroom, even if it contains divine names; one should simply, if one happens to come across a divine name, flip past it?
——————————————————————————————
Rabbi:
If from the outset it is not expected that they will be there.
——————————————————————————————
Questioner:
The problem is that in philosophy books it is common to use the word “God.” The question is whether that means one should avoid bringing philosophy books into the bathroom because of this concern.
——————————————————————————————
Rabbi:
It seems to me that in philosophy books this is not considered a sacred divine name, for two main reasons: first, it is written in a form that is not the actual divine name (which is also why I write it that way in my own books). Second, usually they do not mean our God (the religious one, and especially not the Jewish one). For example, when one writes “god” in the sense of important people (judges), that is not a sacred name.
——————————————————————————————
Questioner:
Is there an essential difference between the philosophical God and the religious God?
Also, beyond divine names, what is the law regarding the following with respect to bringing them into a bathroom:
1. Complete verses without divine names
2. Partial verses without divine names (for example, like “Love your neighbor as yourself”)
3. Common rabbinic sayings (like “Everything is foreseen, yet freedom of choice is given”)
4. Names that refer to the Holy One, blessed be He, but are not included among the names that may not be erased, such as: Hashem, G‑d, the Holy One, blessed be He, etc.
——————————————————————————————
Rabbi:
There is no difference; it is the same object. But only the proper name refers to His essence. The other names describe Him, and therefore they are context-dependent. Two different descriptions of the same object are not like two actual names of it. In truth, regarding the proper name (the Tetragrammaton), one should be stringent about this. 1. With a complete verse, the custom is to be stringent and require a cover, as I wrote above. 2. With partial verses, the custom is to be lenient, especially if they are used in ordinary language to express things that are not the verse itself. Otherwise, if there were a book telling about Shimon saying to his friend, “Hear, O Israel, come let’s go for a walk,” it would be forbidden to bring it in there. 3. Same as above. 4. If they are not names that possess sanctity, it is permitted. Such as Hashem, G‑d, etc.