Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam testified in the name of Rabbi Natan his brother in the name Rabbi Elazar Hisma, that we [chaverim] do not make Tahorot for an am ha'aretz. [In addition], do not make him Terumah dough in purity (i.e., if the am ha'aretz is a Kohen). But one can make him ritually pure but unconsecrated dough in a state of purity, separate Challah (i.e. the Kohen's portion of the dough) from it, and give it to him inside a k'fisha* and an am ha'aretz can come and take this and that [the k'fisha and the dough]. Do not make him ritually pure Terumah olives*, but one can make him ritually pure but unconsecrated olives, separate from them the priestly portion, and give to him inside a vessel of a chaver, and the am ha'aretz can come and take both of them [the olives and the vessel].

Similarly, we do not give the priestly portion [to anyone] except to a Kohen who is a chaver, and that way we do not pay the principal and a fifth (see Lev. 4:24) except to a Kohen who is a chaver. Where a [Kohen who is an] am ha'aretz eats the priestly portion, he [must] pay the principal and a fifth to a Kohen who is a chaver, and the chaver takes Demai [as a gift] to him and thereby appeases the am ha'aretz [by offsetting the penalty].

The priestly portion of a chaver and the priestly portion of an am ha'aretz that got mixed up together, we compel the am ha'aretz to sell his portion. A Kohen (lit., "Jewish Priest") [can] share [the priestly portion] with a Samaritan Priest within Samaritan territory, because he is like one who delivers from his hand.* However, this is not done in the Land [of Israel], lest [the Samaritans] have presumptions on (i.e., believe themselves entitled to the privileges of) the priesthood [in the Land of Israel]. But in the Land of Israel, in a place that they know him (i.e., the Samaritan Priest (perhaps implying that the population is diverse in that locale)), it is permitted to share with him.

A Jewish Priest [can] eat with a Samaritan Priest when [the food is] made in [a state of] impurity, but when [it is] made in [a state of] purity, behold, he does not eat it with him, because he feeds him the meat of an unblemished first-born [calf], and has him drink wine from a [ritually] pure fourth[-year vineyard].*

Originally they (i.e., the Sages) said that [as to] a chaver that becomes a tax collector, we force him out of the chaverut [presumably, permanently], and then they reconsidered to say, that as long as he is a tax collector, he is not [even considered] trustworthy, [but once he] separates from [his office of] tax collector, behold, he is [considered] trustworthy. (Cf. Bekh. 31a:4.)

A chaver that leases from an am ha'aretz* fig trees or vineyards*, he tithes and gives him [his portion], but he does not give him [anything] but what is his [portion].*

The son of a chaver that goes to the home of his maternal grandfather [who is an] am ha'aretz, his father should not be concerned about whether they will feed him food that is not tithed. If he had fruits in his hand, [he should] not be concerned that they are not tithed. [But] if he (i.e., the son) said to him, "Feed [this to] me," [the father first] tithes it and then feeds him.

A chaver should not serve [as a waiter] at the wedding feast of an am ha'aretz or the dinner of an am ha'aretz except when everything was in order and tithed under his control, indeed even each wine ladle [Y. Dem. II.2.7 (following Guggenheimer)]. Moreover, [where there is] a chaver that serves [as a waiter] at the wedding feast of an am ha'aretz or at the dinner of an am ha'aretz, behold, it is presumed that everything is [properly] tithed.

[In contrast,] a chaver that was sitting [as a guest] at the wedding feast of an am ha'aretz -- and even if we see him take and eat food immediately, it is not presumed to have been tithed, as he may have tithed "in his heart"*. [But in the case that] his son was dining next to him, he [must] tithe for him. [But] if thee is someone else [dining next to him], he does not tithe for him. [And if] his son was sitting in another place [not next to his father, the father still] tithes for him.

The son of a chaver that was dining at a wedding feast of an am ha'aretz [or] at a dinner of an am ha'aretz, even if we see him take [food] and eat it immediately, [or] take and drink [wine immediately], it is not presumed to be tithed, as he may have tithed "in his heart," even though they said that all these things may become a snare for others [?]. [But] if he partnered with [an am ha'aretz] in a store, behold, this (i.e., all the food) is presumed to be tithed.

An am ha'aretz that was working in the store of a chaver, even though the chaver may leave and come back, behold, this is permitted, and there is no [need to be] concerned about switching (i.e., that the am ha'aretz has secretly switched the store's tithed produce for his own untithed produce).

[If a man] was trustworthy but his wife was not trustworthy, we may purchase [produce] from him but we may not be guests at his house, and [that is so] even though the [Sages] said, behold, he is like one who dwells with a snake in a wicker basket (i.e., his wife will control what is served and he will not interfere). [If] his wife is trustworthy but he is not trustworthy, we may be guests and his house, but we may not purchase [produce] from them. [If] he is trustworthy and one of his sons is trustworthy, or one of his (male) servants is trustworthy*, or one of his female servants is trustworthy, we purchase [produce] and we eat [their produce at their homes] on their word [that their produce is tithed] and we prepare food for them. [But] during Shevi'it (the seventh year of the agricultural cycle, when fields must lie fallow) as as to Taharot (foods requiring preparation in a state of ritual purity), we are not allowed to do that (i.e., trust them at their word).*

The sages did not obligate bakers to separate [from Demai produce] any more than suffices for the priestly portion [of the produce used to make the dough] and for Challah [the dough offering] (see Dem. 2:4). And they are exempt from the second [tithe]. In what context does this apply? To the seller in his [own] store or at the entrance of his house [not "store," following the Raibag of Vilna], but the seller in a bakery or in the store next to his own store, is liable in the second [tithe].

[If produce] which is usually measured out [for sale] in a large [quantity] was measured out in either a large or a small [quantity], the small quantity is treated as if it was a large [quantity] [If produce] which is usually measured out in a small quantity was measured in either a small or large [quantity], the large quantity is treated as if it was small. (See Dem. 2:5).

These are the things that are sold in bulk: [all] types of grain. And beans are typically measured in small [quantities], the words of Rabbi Meir. But the Sages say, even things that are typically measured in small [quantities] and are [then] measured in large [quantities], these may be [measured] in abundance and sold as Demai [without first tithing]. [But] if they are measured in small [quantities], behold, these are liable [in the laws of Demai (and he must tithe them first)]. Rabbi Nehemiah says, [with regards to] the sale in small [quantities], behold it is like small [quantities], and in large [quantities], behold, it is like large [quantities] (i.e., all produce sold in bulk is treated the same, and all produce sold in small quantities is treated the same, without regard to what is "typical"). Rabbi Yishmael son of Rabbi Yochanan son of Berokah says, one who sells in small [quantities], behold, he is liable [to tithe] even if he sold [a quantity as small as] as a seah and a quarter (cf. Dem. 2:5), he needs to tithe the quarter (i.e. 20 percent of the whole, reflecting first and second tithes). Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says in the name of Rabbi Yosei, baskets of figs and baskets of grapes and bushels of vegetables (see Dem. 2:5) [sold for at at least ] a nummus* [are considered] a large quantity, and from a nummus and lower [is considered] a small quantity. And for moist [produce], a hin [and upward] [is considered] a large quantity and from a hin and lower [is considered] a small quantity. And so it happened that Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel said in the name of Rabbi Yosei, [as to] a K'liyah (=triple-thread, per Jastrow) of garlic, behold, that is [considered] a large quantity.*

They did not permit selling Demai except to a wholesale dealer. A homeowner who sells both this and that (i.e., both large and small quantities, per Lieberman) needs to tithe, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the Sages say, one wholesale dealer and one homeowner are permitted to sell [Demai] and to send it to their friend, and give it to him as a present.

[With respect to one who] sends [produce to another], whether [through] an am ha'aretz or [through] a chaver, he [presumably, the sender] needs to tithe it. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says, [if he sends it] to an am ha'aretz, he [the sender] needs to tithe it, and [if he sends it] to a chaver, he [the chaver] needs to know (i.e., that it needs to be tithed, and therefore the sender doesn't need to tithe it). Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said, it so happened that Rabbi Yosah son of Rabbi sent me a large etrog from Tizippori, and he said, "This came into my hands from Caesarea." And I learned from this three things: first, that it was certainly untithed, [second] that it was impure, and [third] that the [messenger] only had this one [etrog] in the hands, for if he had in his hands another one, he would have taken tithes from that one for it (i.e., on behalf of the etrog that was delivered to Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel).

One who purchases from a merchant, and he says, this one is "fixed" (i.e., tithes have been taken) and this one is not fixed, even as to the one [that he says is] fixed, we don't believe [him]. [However,] one who typically sells Demai is believed.

A chaver that was selling [produce] in abundance and [which] was tithed, and he was assigned something that was Demai, he needs to inform [the purchaser] because everything that is Demai, one needs to inform. Rabban Gamliel used to feed his workers Demai (see Dem. 3:1), and he let them know. But if a homeowner [has already] informed them about the same type [of produce (i.e., that he subsequently sells or provides them)], then he doesn't need to inform them [again].

[In the case of] collectors for the communal fund, they don't collect [produce] or distribute it on Yom Tov [a holiday when work is prohibited] in they way they collect and distribute it on non-sacred days, but they collect discreetly, put it into their lap, and divide it to each and every neighborhood individually.*

[In the case of] charity collectors (cf. Dem. 3:1), in Shevi'it [the seventh year of the agricultural cycle, when fields lie fallow], they skip (lit., "jump over") the entrances of those who eat Shevi'it-produce, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the Sages say, there is no need to be particular about those who eat Shevi'it-produce, as they even give them bread, and they take it from them, that there is no need to suspect [any] gifts, except for money and eggs. [Even] if there was a city filled with people who ate Shevi'it-produce, there [would be] no need to be particular with those who eat Shevi'it-produce. [However,] the Priests [who] collect in [a state of ritual] cleanliness need to be particular with those who eat Shevi'it-produce.