(R. Yonah citing R. Chiyah citing Reish Lakish): Our Mishnah is like R. Akiva's opinion [but says even a bigger Chidush, that it is even l'Chatchilah - R. SHLOMO SIRILIYO].

(R. Yochanan): It is like everyone. Once she puts the water, this is "Reishis Arisoseichem'';

(Beraisa): Ma'aser Tevel (Terumas Ma'aser was not taken from it) that became mixed with Chulin, any amount [of Ma'aser Tevel] forbids. If he has Parnasah (similar Tevel) from elsewhere to fix it, he separates according to the calculation [of how much Terumas Ma'aser should be taken from the Ma'aser Tevel];

If not (he has no other Ma'aser Tevel), he declares the Terumas Ma'aser in it, and [if there is enough Chulin], it is Batel in 101 and he raises [from the mixture the amount of Terumas Ma'aser and gives it to a Kohen, lest he steal from the Kohanim - OHR SOMAYACH, Hilchos Pesulei ha'Mukdashim 12:15].

(R. Yakov Gevuliya citing R. Chaninah): The Halachah follows R. Elazar ben Arach.

(R. Yochanan): From what they taught women (brought below), this teaches that the Halachah does not follow R. Elazar ben Arach!

Question: What did they teach women?

Answer: They should say 'this is Chalah on this dough, and the Se'or mixed with it, and the flour that remains (did not get kneaded), and the cakes underneath (the main dough). When it will all be one mass, what is in my hand will be Hukdash for Chalah, except for the Tamei in it' (in the dough, for one may not separate Tahor on Tamei. R. SHIMSHON - since it is Min ha'Mukaf at the time of the declaration, we are not concerned if it is not Min ha'Mukaf when it takes effect.)

[If the Halachah followed R. Elazar ben Arach], he should say "it and the Tamei in it'', and [the Tamei] is Batel in 101!

Rebuttal #1: R. Yonah citing R. Shmuel Kapodkiya and one of the Rabanan [argued about this]. One said, here (R. Elazar ben Arach discusses) when there is [101] to be Mevatel [the Tamei], and here (the text for women was made for even when) there is not enough to be Mevatel.

Rebuttal #2 (the other of R. Shmuel Kapodkiya and one of the Rabanan): Since he does not need Bitul (he can say 'except for the Tamei in it'), he is like one who has from where to fix it. (GRA, R. ISAR ZALMAN MELTZER.)

Limitation (R. Yosi): It seems that this is on Erev Shabbos, when this one brings [a large dough] and this one brings, it is like separating from Chiyuv on Chiyuv (there are five Reva'im once the water is put);

However, on a weekday [she does not separate until it is all one mass, lest initially there is not the Shi'ur for Chalah. Granted,] they enacted that [Chalah] may be taken from Tahor on Tamei ('except for the Tamei in it', i.e. only what is Tahor becomes Chalah, even if part of the dough is Tamei) and Lo Min ha'Mukaf (she separates now also for what will be added later, and pieces). Did they permit from Patur on Chiyuv?!

Before it is one mass, it is [physically] taken for Chalah (but it is not yet Kadosh, for it is exempt). After it is one mass, it is Kadosh for Chalah. (This is Patur on Chiyuv! Rather, she does not separate until it is all one mass.)

Rebuttal (R. Yonah): Is it not reasonable rather [that they enacted so only] on a weekday, but on Erev Shabbos, she must say 'it and the Tamei in it.'

Question: What is the reason?

Answer: (On a weekday, surely the Tamei from any dough is less than the Shi'ur of Chalah, and they do not join, for she does not want them to mix. However, on Shabbos there can be a Shi'ur of Tamei.) If you say 'except for the Tamei in it (in the dough)', it turns out that Tamei Tevel is mixed with Chulin (the dough);

Since you say 'it and the Tamei in it', they are Tamei Chulin. Is it not better to separate from Tahor on Tamei, and Tevel Tamei will not be mixed with the Chalah?!

Note: There is an implied question. If the text for women is for a weekday, perhaps there is not the Shi'ur for Chalah when she separates, and this is from Patur on Chiyuv!

Answer (R. Shmuel bar Avduma): Is it not Kadosh [later, when there is a Shi'ur] retroactively? Since it is Kadosh retroactively, it is like separating from Chiyuv on Chiyuv. (We explained this based on GRA, HA'GAON RAV C. KANIEVSKY, SHLITA.)

Question: Why [did our Mishnah say] 'as long as there are not five Reva'im of flour' [that did not mix with the water? Her separation helps for everything that will be mixed in!]

Answer (Rebbi): Our Mishnah is before they taught women [to say like R. Yochanan taught. We adopted the text of SMaK and KOL BO, for according to most Meforshim, there is no difference between Kohanos and others. Also, if they taught only Kohanos, what was the question? The Mishnah is for others!]