(Mishnah): If a Seris did Chalitzah, he did not disqualify her (from Kehunah. If he had Bi'ah with her, he disqualified her.)

Inference: A Yavam Seris disqualifies a Yevamah through Bi'ah (because it is Eshes Ach without the Mitzvah of Yibum), but a stranger does not.

Suggestion: This refutes Rav Hamnuna:

(Rav Hamnuna): If a Shomeres Yavam had Bi'ah with a stranger, she may not do Yibum. (She is like an Eshes Ish who was Mezaneh; she becomes a Zonah.)

Rejection: No, also a stranger who has Bi'ah with her disqualifies her. Since the Reisha discusses the Yavam, also the Seifa does.

(Mishnah): Also an Ailonis who did Chalitzah (is not disqualified, unless she had Bi'ah).

Inference: If she did not have Bi'ah, she is Kesherah to Kehunah.

This is unlike R. Yehudah, who says that every Ailonis is a Zonah.

(Mishnah): A Seris Chamah Kohen who married a Bas Yisrael permits her to eat Terumah;

R. Yosi and R. Shimon say, an Androginus Kohen who married a Bas Yisrael permits her to eat Terumah;

R. Yehudah says, a Tumtum who was torn and found to be a male does not do Chalitzah, since he is like a Seris.

An Androginus may marry a woman, but he may not be married to a man;

R. Eliezer says, one is stoned for Bi'ah with an Androginus, like with a man.

(Gemara) Question: This is obvious (that the wife of a Seris Chamah Kohen eats Terumah)!

Answer: One might have thought that only a man who can have children permits others to eat Terumah. The Mishnah teaches that this is not so.

(Mishnah): R. Yosi and R. Shimon say, an Androginus ...

(Reish Lakish): He permits his wife to eat Terumah, but not Chazah v'Shok (the chest and foreleg of a Shelamim, which are given to Kohanim).

(R. Yochanan): He permits her to eat even Chazah v'Shok.

Question: Why does Reish Lakish permit her to eat Terumah, but not Chazah v'Shok? Both are forbidden mid'Oraisa to a Zar!

Answer: He permits her to eat Terumah only nowadays, when it is only mid'Rabanan.

Question: Does he forbid her when the Mikdash stands and Terumah is mid'Oraisa? If so, why did he teach that she may not eat Chazah v'Shok? He should have distinguished within Terumah itself, that she may only eat Rabbinic Terumah, but not Terumah mid'Oraisa!

Answer: This is what he taught! He permits her to eat Rabbinic Terumah nowadays, but not when there is Chazah v'Shok (i.e. when the Beis ha'Mikdash stands), even Rabbinic Terumah, lest she come to eat Terumah mid'Oraisa.

R. Yochanan (to Reish Lakish): Do you hold that Terumah is only mid'Rabanan nowadays?

Reish Lakish: Yes. I learn from a Beraisa!

(Beraisa): A ring (of pressed figs of Terumah that was mixed with rings of Chulin) becomes Batel (one may eat from the mixture. If Terumah (of grain) was mid'Oraisa, we would be stringent about all Terumah and say that something sold by number is not Batel!)

Objection (R. Yochanan - Beraisa): A piece (of a Korban that was mixed with other pieces) becomes Batel (even though it is an Isur mid'Oraisa)!

Do you think that the Mishnah (brought below) says 'All that (i.e. even sometimes) is counted (is never Batel)'? The text is, 'That which (always) is counted'!

Question: About which Mishnah do they argue?

Answer (Mishnah - R. Meir): Bundles of clover of Kil'ai ha'Kerem (crossbreeds in a vineyard) must be burned. If they became mixed with (permitted) bundles, all must be burned;

Chachamim say, they are Batel if there are 201 bundles in all.

R. Meir says, all that it is normally counted, forbids (it is never Batel);

Chachamim say, only six things are never Batel - nuts of Parech, pomegranates of Badan, sealed barrels (of wine), Chilfos Tardin (an esteemed species of beet - Me'iri), large stalks of cabbage, and Greek gourds;

R. Akiva adds a seventh, loaves of a homeowner.

Some of these (the first three) are forbidden (the first three years of the tree) due to Orlah. The others are forbidden if they were Kil'ayim b'Kerem.

R. Yochanan says, the text (of R. Meir's words) is "That which is counted';

Reish Lakish says, it says 'All that is counted'.

Question: What is the Beraisa about 'a piece'?

Answer (Beraisa): If a Tamei piece of a Chatas or of Lechem ha'Panim was mixed with 100 Tahor pieces, it is Batel;

R. Yehudah says, it is not;

If a Tahor piece of a Chatas or Lechem ha'Panim was mixed with 100 Tahor Chulin pieces, all agree that it is not Batel.

Question (against Reish Lakish): (Even though pieces are counted,) the Reisha teaches that it is Batel!

Answer (R. Chiya brei d'Rav Huna): The case is, the piece was dissolved.

Question: If so, why does R. Yehudah say that it is not Batel?