Tosefta sobre Terumot 1:1

R. Yehuda says: One who is deaf who sets aside terumah - his terumah is a [valid] terumah. R. Yehuda told a story of the sons of R. Yochanan b. Godgeda who were deaf, and all of the purity rules of Jerusalem were taken care of by them. They said to him regarding that proof, that the purity rules do not require thought, and [thus] they are taken care of by those who are deaf, insane, or minors, [but] terumah and tithes require thought. R. Yitzhak says in the name of R. Elezar: The terumah of one who is deaf should not go out as profane, because there is doubt – perhaps he has knowledge, perhaps he does not have knowledge. How [should] they treat him? The court [should] assign him guardians, [so that when] he sets aside terumah they confirm for him [that he has done it correctly]. R. Simon b. Gamliel says: Who is considered to be deaf? Everyone who was deaf from his birth [is considered to be deaf], but one who [initially] is sensible and becomes deaf, he writes and they provide confirmation.

Who is considered to be insane? One who goes out alone at night, and one who stays overnight in the cemetery, and one who tears his chair, and one who destroys things that people give to him. [For one who is] sometimes insane, sometimes sane, this is the general rule: Whenever he is insane, regard him as someone who is insane in all respects, and [whenever he is] sane, regard him as someone who is sensible in all respects (see Rosh Hashanah 28a:16).

R. Yehuda says: A minor whose father places him in a cucumber field – [when] he sets aside terumah and his father speaks on his behalf, his terumah is a [valid] terumah. They said: It is not he [the minor] who sets aside terumah, but rather his father who confirms his act.

How could someone set aside as terumah something that does not belong to him? He could go down to the middle of his neighbor’s field and glean and set aside terumah while not being in poverty. If they consider it robbery, his terumah is not a [valid] terumah, but if not, his terumah is a [valid] terumah. How could one know if it were considered robbery or not? The case when the master of the house comes out and finds him, and says to him: ‘Cut it out!’ with pleasantries – if there were pleasantries it is not considered robbery, but if not, regard it to be considered robbery. If the master of the house had harvested and added to it, in either case it is not considered robbery.

A Gentile that [separates] terumah -- his terumah is valid terumah (but see Ter. 1:1). In what case does this apply? [In the case of] a threshing floor, he separated terumah and gave it to a Kohen, [or separated] first tithes and gave them to a Levite [or separated] poor person's tithes and gave them to a poor person. [If his] produce is properly tithed [but] he brings his produce into his house, his produce is [considered] spoiled. An Israelite who is suspected of having brought his produce into his house, his produce [is considered] spoiled. A Samaritan is like a Gentile, the words of Rebbi. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says, a Samaritan is like an Israelite.

[There are] ten [types of Kohanim to whom] we do not distribute terumah from the threshing floor (Yevamot 99b:13), and they are: A deaf-mute, an insane person, and a minor, a tumtum (whose genitals are concealed), and a hermaphrodite, and a slave, and a woman, and an uncircumcised man, and one who is impure, and one who marries an unsuitable woman (i.e., one who is disqualified from marrying a Kohen). But as to all of them, we may send them terumah, to their homes, with the exception of one who is impure, and one who marries an unsuitable woman.