Talmud do Terumot 2:1

We have stated about this, “three or four qab,” hence two qab go by one in 24³⁵The rule of the first Mishnah covers all seeds which need between four and three seah, i. e., between ⅔ and ½ seah per bet seah. Hence, seeds that need less volume are considered kitchen vegetables and go by ¹/₂₄. In slightly different language, this is explicitly stated in Tosephta Kilaim 1:16.. “In truth;” Rebbi Eleazar said that every place where they stated “in truth,” it is practice going back to Moses on Mount Sinai.³⁶This principle is also accepted in the Babli, Baba Meẓia‘ 60a. And we stated about this, for example a qab or half a qab³⁷Halakhah 1, Notes 22–24.Hence, two qab go by a quarter. Here you say, two qab by a quarter, and there you say, two qab by one in 24. Rebbi Zeïra and Rebbi Abun in the name of Rav Huna; one says, nine qab, the other says, eight qab³⁸If one only needs 2 qab, ⅓ seah, for seeding, then the contamination is by a quarter, as expressed in the Tosephta, not for 1 seah but for 1⅓ to 1½ seah (8 to 9 qab). For smaller quantities, one goes by the ¹/₂₄ rule; the two statements are complementary, not contradictory..

MISHNAH: Some rules apply to heave and tithe but not to First Fruits since heave and tithe forbid on the threshing floor¹¹³Once grain has been threshed and cleaned, one may not eat from it unless heave and tithes were separated. For produce other than grain, the equivalents of the threshing floor are defined in Ma‘serot, Chap. 1., they have a fixed measure¹¹⁴Tithes by biblical decree, heave by rabbinic standard., apply to all produce¹¹⁵By rabbinic standard for all produce except grain, wine, and olive oil., are due whether the Temple exists or not, and apply to sharecroppers, tenant farmers, sicarii, and robbers. They apply to heave and tithe but not to First Fruits¹¹⁶Cf. Mishnah 1:2..
Some rules apply to First Fruits but not to heave and tithe. For First Fruits acquire [hallowed status] when connected to the ground, a person may dedicate his entire field as First Fruits, he is responsible for them, and they need a sacrifice, song, weaving, and staying overnight.
Heave of the tithe is similar to First Fruits in two ways and to heave in two ways. It may be taken from pure for impure and from produce not earmarked, like First Fruits¹²⁶This is explained in Terumot 2:1, Notes 7–15.. It forbids the threshing floor¹¹⁸First tithe, which cannot be consumed unless heave of the tithe is given. The sentence is from Ḥallah 1:4, Note 123. and it has a measure like heave¹²⁷The required amount for heave of the tithe is 1% by biblical decree and that of heave is between 2.5% and 1⅔% by rabbinic usage..

“In truth;” Rebbi Eliezer^178aThis reading is found also in Sabbat 10:4 (12c, 1. 46). But in the other occurrences in the Yerushalmi, Sabbat 1 (3b 1. 69), Kilaim 2:2 Note 36, Terumot 2:1 Note 16, the name is "Eleazar" (Lazar). In the Babli the quote is anonymous in Sabbat 92b; it appears in the name of R. Eleazar in Baba mesi'a 60a. said that every place where they stated “in truth,” refers to practice going back to Moses on Mount Sinai.

A Levite who received unprepared tithes⁶²First Tithes of which the heave of the tithe was not given to the Cohen. Tithe may not be eaten before the heave of the tithe is separated (Num.18:26). The heave of the farmer has no minimum spelled out from the Torah, but it must be given from the harvest itself. The heave of the tithe is fixed at 10% but it may be given from anywhere (Terumot 2:1); hence, the Levite may use any fruit he has for that tithe. and found in them gleanings may use them for the heave of the tithes even on other places. But do not gleanings belong to the poor? Rebbi Avin in the name of the rabbis from there⁶³Babylonia.: I say that they are gleanings cut with the bunches⁶⁴As spelled out in the Mishnah. The Levite does not commit a sin since he is not using property acquired illegally to satisfy a religious duty. The Tosephta (Peah 3:14) simply states: “A Levite to whom grapes were given, among which he found gleanings, does not have to worry whether they might belong to the poor.”.

¹⁰⁰This paragraph is from Terumot 2:1 and explained there, Note 35-44. It was stated: “Rebbi Illaï says in the name of Rebbi Eliezer: For food in fluids, one gives heave from pure for impure. How is this? If somebody pickled olives in impurity and wants to give heave in purity, he brings a funnel whose opening is less than [the width of] an egg, fills it with olives and puts it on top of the amphora; it turns out that he gives heave from what is earmarked.” Why does it have to be less than [the width of] an egg? Are these not single pieces? It is only that not many olives should become impure. “They said to him, the only food fluids called fluid are wine and olive oil.” How is that? One beam for two pits or two beams for one pit. [One understands one beam for two pits, but two beams for one pit?]¹⁰¹This sentence is in Terumot and here in the Rome ms., missing in the Leyden ms. Is it not that if it is partially impure it is totally impure? Rebbi La in the name of Rebbi Assi: Explain it, if he had intended to process it in one batch, and he changed his mind to make it in two batches. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, this applies if it became impure after he siphoned off [the froth] and [the seeds] formed lumps. But if it became impure before lumps were formed and he siphoned off, it does not apply. Rebbi Tabi, Rebbi Joshia in the name of Rebbi Yannai: Practice follows Rebbi Eliezer. Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia followed Rebbi Eliezer¹⁰²In Terumot: “Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: Practice follows Rebbi Eliezer.” In view of the penultimate sentence, the formulation here is preferable.. Rebbi Ḥuna in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: Practice does not follow Rebbi Eliezer. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun, Rav Jehudah in the name of Samuel: Practice does not follow Rebbi Eliezer. There came a case before [Rebbi Immi]¹⁰³From the Terumot text; name missing here in both mss. and he did not decide; he said there are two against two. They said to him, but Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman agreed! Nevertheless, he gave no opinion.