Canceling leaven

Hello Rabbi, first of all, it is not simple that this is a detail in the laws of the mitzvah of teshvithu, especially for those who claim that it applies from the sixth hour and above. Besides, I would say that what does not need a source is regarding the pakar, which is simply that it is beneficial because there is no longer ownership of that chametz. For that, obviously, there is no need for an explanation, since the entire prohibition is in my chametz. Therefore, the mechanism of the pakar is simple that it is beneficial not to transgress it without seeing it and without finding it. Now the Chazal come and say that there is a way to sever specific ownership in chametz (and I also do not know since when it is beneficial, is it also beneficial a week before the sixth hour or just before the evening meal?) And this way is different from the pakar, so it does not seem logical to me that the Chazal would think that this is correct from an explanation unless they really explain that they are merely interpreting the mitzvah of teshvithu, and for that I ask what the source is that this is really what they are doing? I saw that Shreshi writes this, but where does he get it from? Thank you and happy holidays!

I don't understand what other reason there is to cancel. It's a suspension, and perhaps also avoiding something that will be seen and found.
If an argument states that I don't transgress over leaven that isn't mine, and therefore the one who doesn't have it is beneficial, a similar argument says that cancellation would be beneficial.

But where did they come up with that? In other words, how did they understand that this is what you are saying? The rabbi doesn't have to answer if he feels he has exhausted himself. Thank you very much for all your work!

I don't understand the question. They didn't invent anything. The Sages understood from the interpretation that this is a Sabbath.

So what is the disagreement among the Sages about whether it is possible to burn or destroy in any way? Can't we see from that that they understand that desecration is a real action?

The conditions differed regarding the method of eliminating chametz. If one makes a cancellation in this way, it is destroyed and there is no need to destroy it. The sages of the rabbinate have established that even if one cancels it, it will still burn (lest it be eaten). Beyond that, there is important chametz for which cancellation is not beneficial (because one does not seriously intend to cancel it), and for this, physical elimination is required.

Interesting. I am currently reading your lesson summaries on Tractate Pesachim (of the doctoral program). We would also be happy if you return to the topic in a series of lessons someday. Thank you Rabbi for the response!