Siman - Pesachim Daf 27

• Smoldering coals or flickering coals of a forbidden substance

It was stated in the Baraisa on Daf 26b, בישלה על גבי גחלים דברי הכל מותר – If one cooked bread over the coals of forbidden substances, such as kilay hakerem straw, all agree that the bread is permitted to be eaten. Rav Yehudah said an opinion in the name of Shmuel, and Rebbe Chiya bar Ashi said a dissenting opinion in the name of Rebbe Yochanan: One said, לא שנו אלא גחלים עוממות – The Baraisa only referred to smoldering coals, אבל גחלים לוחשות אסורין – but loaves baked over flickering coals are forbidden according to Rebbe who holds שבח עצים בפת, the improvement of the wood is contained in the bread. If the coals are still flickering, then the fuel is not considered completely burnt up and it is still forbidden. The other one said, אפילו גחלים לוחשות נמי מותרין – Even loaves baked over flickering coals are permitted according to everyone.

The Gemara challenged the second opinion and asked, in what case then would Rebbe forbid the bread, and answered, כשאבוקה כנגדו – When the flame is opposite it during the baking. Rebbe views the heat as emanating from the yet-intact wood, and therefore rules that the improvement of the wood is contained in the bread.

• On oven fired up with hekdesh wood

Rav Chisda was asked what the halachah is according to the Rabbanon who permit bread that was baked with עצי ערלה or כלאי הכרם, in a case of תנור שהסיקה בעצי הקדש – an oven that one fired up with hekdesh wood, and then one baked bread in it. He ruled that the bread baked in it is forbidden. Rava asked, והלא מעל המסיק – Has the one who fired up the oven with hekdesh not committed an act of me’ilah, and if so, כל היכא דמעל המסיק נפקו להו לחולין – where the one who fires the oven has committed me’ilah by misusing the hekdesh wood, the wood leaves its consecrated state and becomes chullin immediately. So why should the bread be forbidden if it was baked with chullin wood?

Rav Pappa answered, הכא בעצי שלמים עסקינן – In this case we were dealing with wood that was consecrated for the purchase of a shelamim offering. Rashi explains that the consecrated wood is invested with the equivalent of shelamim kedushah. Rav Pappa explained that Rav Chisda was asked what the halachah was according to the view of Rebbe Yehudah who holds that shelamim are not subject to me’ilah even when misappropriated beshogegg, and do not become chullin.

• Rebbe Yehuda’s kal v’chomer to prove chametz needs to be burned

In the Mishnah on Daf 21a, Rebbe Yehudah stated, אין ביעור חמץ אלא שריפה – The disposal of chametz is not fulfilled except through burning. In a Baraisa on this Daf, Rebbe Yehudah attempts to prove his view by bringing a kal v’chomer from nossar. If nossar, which is not subject to the prohibitions of בל יראה ובל ימצא, yet requires elimination through burning, then chametz which is subject to those prohibitions, kal v’chomer should require elimination through burning.

The Chochomim countered, כל דין שאתה דן תחילתו להחמיר וסופו להקל אינו דין – Any kal v’chomer that is initially advanced to apply a stringency but whose end result is a leniency is not valid. If one could not find wood to burn the chametz, according to this kal v’chomer, there would be a leniency that he does not have to do the mitzvah of תשביתו. Therefore, it is not a correct kal v’chomer. Rebbe Yehudah conceded and continued to attempt other proofs for his position.