(Mishnah): If a young tree of Orlah or Kil'ai ha'Kerem became mixed with young trees, he may not harvest them. If he harvested, [the Isur is] Batel in 201 (there are 200 many times as many permitted trees as forbidden), as long as he does not intend to harvest (and permit through Bitul);

R. Yosi says, he may even intend and harvest, and they are Batel in 201.

(Gemara - Mishnah): A young tree of Orlah or Kil'ai ha'Kerem...

Question: [How is a tree of Kil'ai ha'Kerem mixed? If other species are in a vineyard,] are not all the young trees Kil'ai ha'Kerem?!

Answer #1: Our Mishnah discusses a patch of Kil'ai ha'Kerem. (There was a vine in it, which forbade it all. The vine was removed, and now it is not recognized which patch was Kil'ai ha'Kerem.)

Answer #2 (R. Yosi bei R. Bun): He brought a flowerpot with a hole [with a different species inside] and passed it under a vine. (It is not known under which vine he passed it.)

(Reish Lakish citing Chizkiyah): He detaches three clusters [from different vines or trees] and permits (even according to the first Tana. Even if one was Asur, it is Batel in a majority).

Question: Reish Lakish contradicts himself! There, he said in the name of R. Hoshayah 'if there were 150 [sealed] barrels in front of him (and one was of Terumah; sealed barrels are never Batel), if 100 were opened, the 100 are permitted (now that they are open, they are Batel) and 50 are forbidden. When they will be opened, they will be permitted';

(R. Zeira): They said [that they will be permitted] only when they will be opened [by themselves], but l'Chatchilah, it is forbidden to open them.

Summation of question: And here [Reish Lakish] says so (one may detach three l'Chatchilah to permit through Bitul)?!

Answer #1: There [Reish Lakish] said in the name of R. Hoshayah, and here [he said] in the name of Chizkiyah.

Support: Some say there (regarding barrels) that he may open three barrels and permit. This is like Chizkiyah here. (We explained this like R. SHLOMO SIRILIYO.)

Objection: Our Mishnah says 'he may not harvest them'!

Answer #2: [Reish Lakish meant that if he detached three, it is permitted] b'Di'eved.

Question (Mishnah): If he harvested, [the Isur is] Batel in 201.

Answer (R. Yosi bei R. Bun): Here is when he harvested three (it is a Safek whether the Isur is among them, therefore it is Batel in a simple majority). Here is when he harvested all of them (the Isur is Vadai among them, therefore we require 201).

(Beraisa): Pomegranates of Badan (they are one of the esteemed matters that are never Batel) - if it is a Safek [when some are forbidden], they are Batel. If Vadai [some are forbidden], they are not Batel.

Also regarding land it is so. A Safek [Isur attached to the] land is Batel. A Vadai [Isur attached to the] land is not Batel.

Question: What is the case [of Safek Isur]?

Answer: If a young tree of Orlah or Kil'ai ha'Kerem became mixed with young trees. If it is a Safek land, they are Batel. Vadai land is not Batel.

Question (R. Yudan): Does the same apply to Neveilah?

Answer (R. Yudan): Neveilah is not Batel. Land is Batel.