Related do Para 11:15

A seah of impure terumah that fell inside one hundred seahs of pure terumah: Beit Shammai prohibit it (i.e., the entire mixture) and Beit Hillel permit it (alt., per Ramban and Rashba, "Beit Hillel say that it is lifted up at [a proportion of] one hundred and one [to one]"). Said Beit Hillel to Beit Shammai, "[Since] pure [terumah] is forbidden to non-Kohanim, and impure [terumah] is forbidden to Kohanim, just as pure [terumah] is lifted up [from a mixture of chullin and the remainder may be eaten by a non-Kohen], so too is impure [terumah] lifted up [in this case, and the remainder eaten by a Kohen]." Beit Shammai said to them, "No! If you said that with [respect to] pure [terumah] it is lifted up from within [a mixture of] chullin that is fed to non-Kohanim, you must say that with [respect to] impure [terumah], it is not lifted up from within [a mixture of] chullin to be fed to Kohanim." Beit Hillel said to them, "Behold, [with respect to] impure [terumah] that fell inside chullin, [since] you would rule that there is no lifting up from within [a mixture of] chullin to feed to non-Kohanim, [you must concede that] behold, it may [nonetheless] be lifted up." Beit Shammai said to them, "If you state [a principle] with [respect to] chullin, as to which they (i.e., the Sages) were extremely lenient, would you state [the same principle] with [respect to] terumah, as to which they were much less lenient?" Beit Hillel said to them, "With what was the Torah stringent, with feeding terumah to non-Kohanim, or with feeding terumah to Kohanim? With feeding terumah to non-Kohanim. [Thus], a pure [non-Kohen] that ate pure [terumah], and a pure [non-Kohen] that ate impure [terumah], and a pure or impure [non-Kohen] that ate impure [terumah] -- all [are liable for] the death penalty. But [with respect to] feeding terumah to Kohanim, a pure [Kohen] that ate pure [terumah], he is acting as he was commanded. A pure [Kohen] that ate impure [terumah], he [has violated] a positive commandment. And an impure [Kohen] that ate pure [terumah] or an impure [Kohen] that ate impure [terumah], he [as violated] a negative commandment. And are not these things subject to a kol v'chomer (a logical deduction)? So that if in a situation where the Torah was stringent -- in feeding terumah to non-Kohanim, behold, it is lifted up from inside chullin to be eaten by non-Kohanim, ought we not rule that [terumah] is lifted up inside chullin (alt., per MS Erfurt, "inside terumah,") to feed to Kohanim?" After they agreed [and adopted Beit Hillel's position], Rabbi Eliezer says, [the lifted-out portion] is separated as terumah and then burned. And the Sages say, it is nullified due to its insignificance [in comparison with the rest of the mixture, Ter. 5:4].