Study Pesachim folio 27A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
עד שיהא בו כדי להחמיץ. ואמר אביי: לא שנו אלא שקדם וסילק את האיסור, אבל לא קדם וסילק את האיסור — אסור, אלמא זה וזה גורם אסור.
until there is enough of the prohibited leaven to cause the dough to become leavened bread. And Abaye said: R' Eliezer taught that when the permitted leaven fell in last, the mixture is permitted only when he first removed the prohibited leaven before the permitted leaven fell into the dough and made it rise. However, if he did not first remove the prohibited leaven, the dough is prohibited even if the permitted leaven fell in last. Apparently, when both this and that cause the dough to become leavened bread, it is prohibited.
וממאי דטעמא דרבי אליעזר כאביי? דילמא טעמא דרבי אליעזר משום דאחר אחרון אני בא — לא שנא קדם וסילק את האיסור, לא שנא לא קדם וסילק את האיסור. אבל בבת אחת, הכי נמי דשרי!
The Talmud rejects this statement: And from where is it apparent that the reason for R' Eliezer’s opinion is in accordance with Abaye’s explanation? Perhaps the reason for R' Eliezer’s opinion is due to the following, which R' Eliezer said explicitly: I follow the final element. And it is no different if he first removed the prohibited item and it is no different if he did not first remove the prohibited item. However, if they both fell in at once it should be permitted, because where both this and that cause the dough to become leavened bread R' Eliezer rules that the mixture is permitted.
אלא רבי אליעזר דעצי אשירה, דתנן: נטל הימנה עצים — אסורין בהנאה. הסיק בהן את התנור, חדש — יותץ, ישן — יוצן.
Rather, the reference is to the opinion of R' Eliezer with regard to wood from an asheira. As we learned in a Mishnah: If one took wood from an asheira, it is prohibited to derive benefit from it. With regard to one who lit an oven with the wood, if it was a new oven, it must be broken. If it was an old oven, it may be cooled.