WHO FORBIDS ZEH V'ZEH GOREM?
Rejection: Perhaps R. Eliezer attributes the result to the final Gorem, whether or not the Isur was not removed, unlike Abaye - he permits [Zeh v'Zeh Gorem, as long as the Isur did not fall in last, even] if they fell in at the same time!
Answer #2 (Mishnah): Wood from an Asheirah is Asur b'Hana'ah;
If it was used to heat a new oven, it must be destroyed; if it was used to heat an old oven, it must cool down;
If one baked in it [before it cooled down], the bread is forbidden; if the bread became mixed with other bread, it is forbidden to benefit from any of them;
R. Eliezer says, he takes the amount he benefited (Rashi - the cost of [Heter] wood of the amount of Asheirah wood he used; Tosfos (Avodah Zarah) - the value of the bread) and throws it in the sea, then he may benefit (Ra'avad on the Rif - but not eat; Ri (in Avodah Zarah) - or even eat) from all of them.
Chachamim: One cannot redeem [something forbidden on account of] idolatry! (Really, these Chachamim also forbid Zeh v'Zeh Gorem - we do not know who they are, so we just say that R. Eliezer forbids it.)
Question: Perhaps R. Eliezer forbids Zeh v'Zeh Gorem only regarding idolatry, which is stringent - he did not say so regarding other Isurim!
Answer #1: If he does not say so regarding other Isurim, who is the Tana of Beraisa #1 above?!
Answer #2 (Beraisa): R. Eliezer similarly forbids [Zeh v'Zeh Gorem] regarding all Isurim.
(Abaye): If the first Tana of Beraisa #1 forbids Zeh v'Zeh Gorem, Rebbi holds like R. Eliezer;
If he permits Zeh v'Zeh Gorem, Rebbi forbids the bread because Yesh Shevach Etzim b'Pas - bowls, cups and plates [made in a kiln heated with forbidden wood] are forbidden (there is Shevach Etzim inside, and they are used without a Gorem of Heter).
Version #1: They argue about ovens and pots - they are forbidden according to the opinion that forbids Zeh v'Zeh Gorem.
Version #2: All agree that a pot is forbidden, for it holds food before cooking [at the time it is the only Gorem].
(Rav Yosef citing Shmuel): If an oven was heated with peels of Orlah or straw of Kil'ai ha'Kerem:
If it is a new oven, it must be destroyed; if it is an old oven, one must let it cool down;
If one baked in it [while it was still hot], Rebbi permits the bread, and Chachamim forbid.
Question: This is the opposite of Beraisa #1 (Rebbi forbids, and Chachamim permit)!
Answer #1: This was Shmuel's text of Beraisa #1 [unlike our text];
Answer #2: Shmuel holds that [normally] the Halachah follows Rebbi against one colleague, but not against many - here, the Halachah follows Rebbi against Chachamim - therefore, Shmuel intentionally switched the opinions in order that people [who assume that the Halachah follows Chachamim] will forbid.
(Beraisa #1): If one cooked on top of coals, all permit the bread.
(Rav Yehudah or R. Chiya bar Ashi): This is only if the coals were dimming (we say that the Isur has changed form, they are permitted) - but if they were glowing (they are like the wood itself), they are forbidden [and Rebbi forbids the bread];
(The other of Rav Yehudah and R. Chiya bar Ashi): Even if the coals were glowing, they are permitted.
Question: According to the first opinion, we understand when Rebbi forbids the bread - but according to the second opinion, Rebbi permits even glowing coals - when does he forbid bread on account of Shevach Etzim b'Pas?
Answer (Rav Papa): The case is, the bread baked by the flame [while the wood was intact].
Question: This implies that Chachamim permit even bread baked by a flame - if so, what Isur applies to wood?!
Answer (R. Ami bar Chama): It is forbidden to make a stool [or other Kelim] from them.
Question (Rami bar Chama): If an oven was heated with Hekdesh wood and used to bake bread, what would Chachamim [who permit bread baked using Orlah and Kil'ai ha'Kerem] say?
Answer (Rav Chisda): Chachamim forbid.
Question #1 (Rami bar Chama): What is the difference between Hekdesh and Orlah?
Answer (Rava): This is not difficult - [one volume of] Orlah is Batel in 200 times its volume of Heter, but Hekdesh is not Batel even in 1000.
Question #2 (Rava): The one who lit the wood was Mo'el - this causes the wood to become Chulin [therefore the bread should be permitted]!
Answer (Rav Papa): The case is, it is wood of a Shelamim, and according to R. Yehudah, who says that Hekdesh becomes Chulin only b'Shogeg, not b'Mezid:
It does not become Chulin b'Mezid because Me'ilah does not apply - likewise, Me'ilah does not apply to Shelamim (it is considered to be [primarily] destined to be consumed by the owner), so it does not become Chulin.
Question: The wood does not become Chulin whenever the one who lit it was Mo'el!
(Beraisa): Ashes of all Nisrafim (Isurei Hana'ah that must be burned) are permitted, except for those of an Asheirah;
[There is another exception,] ashes of Hekdesh are always forbidden.
Answer #1 (Rami bar Chama): The case is, Hekdesh caught fire by itself. (Had someone burned it, he would transgress Me'ilah, the Hekdesh would become Chulin.)
Answer #2 (Rav Shemayah): The Beraisa refers to Terumas ha'Deshen, which requires Genizah (no Me'ilah was done to it):
(Beraisa): "V'Samo" - all the ashes must be placed down, gently, so they will not scatter.
MUST CHAMETZ BE BURNED?
(Mishnah - R. Yehudah): The only way to fulfill Bi'ur is through burning;
(Beraisa - R. Yehudah): A Kal va'Chomer mandates burning to fulfill Bi'ur;
Bal Yera'eh and Bal Yimatzei do not apply to Nosar, yet Nosar must be burned - they apply to Chametz, all the more so burning should be required!
Chachamim: You cannot make a Kal va'Chomer if the stringency leads to a leniency!
If someone has no wood [to burn Chametz], you exempt him from destroying it - but it says "Tashbisu Se'or mi'Bateichem" - any way you can destroy it!
R. Yehudah: I can learn differently [from Mah Matzinu (precedent); Rashash - Rashi does not literally mean a Gezeirah Shavah]:
It is Asur to eat Chametz, just like Nosar - just like Nosar must be burned, also Chametz.
Chachamim: Neveilah disproves this - one may not eat it, yet it need not be burned!
R. Yehudah: These are different! It is Asur to eat or benefit from Chametz, just like Nosar - just like Nosar must be burned, also Chametz [but one may benefit from Neveilah]!
Chachamim: Shor ha'Niskal disproves this - one may not eat or benefit from it, yet it need not be burned!
R. Yehudah: These are different! Chametz is Asur b'Hana'ah and there is Kares for eating it, just like Nosar - just like Nosar must be burned, also Chametz [but there is no Kares for Shor ha'Niskal]!
Chachamim: Chelev of Shor ha'Niskal disproves this - it is Asur b'Hana'ah and there is Kares for eating it, yet it need not be burned!