(Mishnah): If two people received a field as sharecroppers or they inherited or partnered in it, the one who tithes may say to the other, "You take the wheat in this place and I'll take the wheat in another place'' or "You take the wine in this place and I'll take the wine in another place''. However, he may not say, "You take the wheat and I'll take the barley'' or "You take the wine and I'll take the oil''.

If a Chaver and an Am HaAretz inherited their Am HaAretz father; the Chaver may say, "You take the wheat in such and such place and I'll take the wheat in another place'' or "You take the wine in such and such place and I'll take the wine in another place''. But he shouldn't say, "You take the wheat and I'll take the barley'' or "You take the moist and I'll take the dry''.

(Gemara) (Tosefta)(Rebbe): If a Jew and a gentile bought land in Suria, it is like Tevel and Maaser mixed together.

(Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel): The Jew's portion is obligated and the gentile's portion is exempt.

(R. Yasa citing R. Chanina): They disagree when the produce was divided whilst still connected; but if they divided it after it was harvested into a stack (so that it is all mixed together), even Rabban Shimon agrees to Rebbi that each and every stalk is jointly owned.

(R. Yona/ R. Yosi citing R. Yochanan): They disagree when it was divided whilst still connected; but if they divided it after bundling into sheaves, even Rabban Shimon agrees that each and every stalk is jointly owned.

Question: According to R. Yona, what's the difference between a stack and sheaves?

Answer: (They disagree) when one harvests each bunch of stalks and places it down in front of him.

(R. Hoshiya): This (dispute between Rebbi and Rabban Shimon) was when they acquired it on condition that they would not divide; but if they the condition was that they would divide, even Rebbi agrees to Rabban Shimon, that this portion that he receives was considered to have been his from the beginning.

(R. Yosi): But the Rabbis disagree with that - as R. Abahu taught from R. Yochanan that when brothers are partners (in their father's estate) there is a dispute between Rebbi and Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. These brothers who are partners - aren't they going to divide?!

(Mishnah): If a convert and a gentile inherited their father, a gentile; the convert can tell the gentile, "You take the idol and I'll take the money'' or "You take the Yayin Nesech (wine used for idolatry) and I'll take the produce''. But if those prohibited items had already come into his possession, he may not then trade them.

One who sells produce in Suria and said that they come from Eretz Yisrael, the buyer must tithe. If he says that they are tithed, he is believed, because the mouth that prohibited (by saying that they are obligated in tithes) was the mouth that permitted (by saying that they were already tithed).

If the seller said that he grew them himself, the buyer must tithe. If he said that they are tithed, he is believed, because the mouth that prohibited is the mouth that permitted.

But if it is known that the seller has a field in Suria, the buyer must tithe (as even without his admission that he grew them and that they are obligated in tithes, we already knew it).

(Gemara) (Tosefta): If a Jew and a gentile bought the house of a gentile and it contained Yayin Nesech, an idol and money, the Jew cannot say, "You take the wine and the idol and I'll take the money''.

(R. Yochanan): Not only if it's Yayin Nesech, an idol and money, but even if there were two images, one formed like a table and one not formed like a table, he shouldn't tell the gentile, "You take the one not formed like a table and I will take the one formed like a table''.

(R. Zeira): R. Yochanan is correct - the Mishnah earlier (Halacha 6) taught explicitly that if a Chaver and Am HaAretz inherited their father, the Chaver shouldn't say "You take the moist (produce that has become wet and now able to contract Tumah) and I'll take the dry''.

Question: But our Mishnah disagrees with this, as it says that the convert may say, "You take the Yayin Nesech and I'll take the produce''...?

Answer: From that statement's latter clause, you see that it does not disagree - "But if those prohibited items had already come into his possession, he may not then trade them'' - and here (in our Tosefta), since they bought it as partners, it's as if they are selling to each other. However, in the case of the convert and the gentile, it's not considered that they shared it, because a convert only inherits his father MiDeRabbanan.

(Tosefta continues): Akilus (Onkelos) the convert (who translated the Torah into Aramaic) divided his father's estate with his brothers and he was stringent with himself to thrown any benefit into the Dead Sea.

Three Amoraim disagreed over the meaning of 'he was stringent with himself' - one said that it was the money received (by his father) for idols that he threw away. One said that they inherited money and idols and (although the Mishnah permitted him to keep the money) he threw away the money. One said that he (chose to receive idols as his portion) and then threw the idols into the sea. Why did he do this? In order to uproot the idols that his father owned.