A seah of terumah that fell in [a container] of less than one hundred [seahs] of chullin, behold, this is a forbidden mixture [but] they are not liable to pay the principal and a fifth (see Num. 5:7), and they do not pay for them the principal and a fifth from a different place, rather according to the calculation.

A seah of terumah that fell into a hundred or more -- if they were of untithed produce, we make them terumah and tithes on behalf of [produce in] another place, or designate them as terumah of tithes that is in them. If they were tithes from which terumah had not been taken, we make them terumah and tithes on behalf of [produce in] another place, or we designate them as terumah of tithes that is in them. If they were of second tithe, we exchange them for money in accordance with its value as terumah, not including the value of the terumah that is in them. If they were of new produce [from which the omer had not yet been taken] he ways until Pesach comes and he gives them to the priest.

A seah of terumah that fell in less than one hundred [seahs of produce] and created a forbidden mixture of terumah and chullin, if [the one hundred seahs] were of untithed produce, we make it into terumah and tithes on behalf of another place, or we designate it as terumah of tithes that are in it. If it was of tithes from which terumah had not been taken, we make it into terumah and tithe on behalf of another place, or we designate it as terumah of tithes that are in it. And if it was of second tithe, we echange it for money in accordance with its value as terumah, not including the value terumah that is in them. If it was of new produce, he waits until Pesach comes and gives it to the priest.

A seah of terumah that fell into a hundred of seventh-year produce, behold, these [hundred seahs are sufficient to] lift out (i.e., nullify the terumah). Less than that, we let it rot.

A seah of impure terumah that fell inside one hundred seahs of pure terumah: Beit Shammai prohibit it (i.e., the entire mixture) and Beit Hillel permit it*. Said Beit Hillel to Beit Shammai, "[Since] pure [terumah] is forbidden to non-priests, and impure [terumah] is forbidden to priests, just as pure [terumah] is lifted up [from a mixture of chullin and the remainder may be eaten by a non-priest], so too is impure [terumah] lifted up [in this case, and the remainder eaten by a priest]." Beit Shammai said to them, "No! If you said that with [respect to] pure [terumah] it is lifted up from within [a mixture of] chullin that is fed to non-priests, you must say that with [respect to] impure [terumah], it is not lifted up from within [a mixture of] chullin to be fed to priests." Beit Hillel said to them, "Behold, [with respect to] impure [terumah] that fell inside chullin, [since] you would rule that there is no lifting up from within [a mixture of] chullin to feed to non-priests, [you must concede that] behold, it may [nonetheless] be lifted up." Beit Shammai said to them, "If you state [a principle] with [respect to] chullin, as to which they (i.e., the Sages) were extremely lenient, would you state [the same principle] with [respect to] terumah, as to which they were much less lenient?" Beit Hillel said to them, "With what was the Torah [more] stringent, with feeding terumah to non-priests, or with feeding terumah to priests? With feeding terumah to non-priests. [Thus], a pure [non-priest] that ate pure [terumah], and a pure [non-priest] that ate impure [terumah], and a pure or impure [non-priest] that ate impure [terumah] -- all [are liable for] the death penalty. But [with respect to] feeding terumah to priests, a pure [priest] that ate pure [terumah], he is acting as he was commanded. A pure [priest] that ate impure [terumah], he [has violated] a positive commandment. And an impure [priest] that ate pure [terumah] or an impure [priest] that ate impure [terumah], he [as violated] a negative commandment. And are not these things subject to a kol v'chomer (a logical deduction)? So that if in a situation where the Torah was stringent -- in feeding terumah to non-priests, behold, it is lifted up from inside chullin to be eaten by non-priests, ought we not rule that [terumah] is lifted up inside chullin (alt., per MS Erfurt, "inside terumah,") to feed to priests?" After they agreed [and adopted Beit Hillel's position], Rabbi Eliezer says, [the lifted-out portion] is separated as terumah and then burned. And the Sages say, it is nullified due to its insignificance [in comparison with the rest of the mixture, Ter. 5:4].

A seah of terumah that fell into one hundred [seahs] of chullin, and he did not have enough [time] to remove it before another one fell in, behold, [the mixture] is forbidden, and Rabbi Shimon permits it. Said Rabbi Elazar son of Rabbi Shimon, in what case does this apply? When he was not aware of it, and afterwards [the second one] fell in, but if he was aware of it and afterwards the other fell in, behold, it is permitted, since it had already been neutralized*.

Coarse and fine flours [can be aggregated] to neutralize one another, the words of Rabbi Nehemiah. And the Sages say, they do not neutralize one another. A log of water that fell inside ninety-nine of chullin wine, and afterwards a log of [terumah] oil fell inside -- this [the water] neutralizes that [the wine], the words of Rabbi Nehemiah. And the Sages say, they do not neutralize one another.* of water does not combine with the ninety-nine of wine to form a one hundred-log mixture of chullin that would neutralize the log of terumah oil. It would still be 99 against 1.

A seah of orlah that fell into two hundred of chullin and he was aware of it, and afterwards another [seah of orlah] fell inside, behold, [the mixture] is permitted (less than that it is forbidden), [and thus it may continue] until the forbidden exceeds the permitted.*

A seah of terumah that fell into one hundred [of chullin] and afterwards [the entire mixture] fell into [a second batch of] chullin of any amount, behold, it is permitted. A seah of terumah [wheat] that fell into one hundred [of chullin wheat], we do not subtract the zunim (an inedible type of wheat that grows among regular wheat) that is in it (i.e., it may count toward the one hundred). A log of clear wine that fell into one hundred logs of cloudy (i.e., unfiltered) wine, we do not subtract the sediment that is in it (i.e., in the cloudy wine). A log of cloudy wine that fell into into one hundred logs of clear [wine], we do not subtract the sediment that is in it*.

[A batch of terumah] leaven that got mixed up with another [batch of] leaven, and it caused the dough to rise, if the forbidden [portion] does not impart taste, it is permitted. Wheat with barley -- [if they are] sifted [and] ground [together such that they cannot be differentiated], [if the barley does not] impart taste, it is permitted. Beans with lentils, [if they are] sifted [and] cooked [together], [if the beans do not not] impart taste [it is permitted]. Rabbi Yosei says, a cooked dish of beans and a cooked dish of tofach*, behold, they are [considered] one kind. And moreover Rabbi Yosei says, two baskets, one of chullin and one of terumah, and a seah of terumah fell into one of them and he does not know into which of them it fell, both of them are permitted.

Two boxes in two attics, two storage bins in one attic*, behold, these are lifted up. Rabbi Yehuda says, they are not lifted up. Rabbi Shimon says, even if they are in two cities, one lifts up the terumah of the other (Ter. 4;12). [If there were] one hundred [in one city] and there were not one hundred [in the other city], [he may declare,] "Behold, I say, that inside the one hundred fell one [with the potential to create] a forbidden mixture and one without [the potential to create] a forbidden mixture, behold, I say that inside the forbidden mixture it fell (thus creating a ratio of 101 to 1)."

Two boxes -- in this one are 40 seahs and in that one there are less than 40 seahs, and one seah fell inside one of them, and it is known into which of them it fell, but afterwards a second fell and it is not known into which place (i.e., which box) it fell, [he may declare,] "Behold, I can render it dependent, and say, that into the place that the first one fell, the second fell as well." [But if the first] seah of terumah fell inside one of them and it is not known into which of them it fell, he cannot render [the second] dependent [on the first], and [cannot say] that the second fell into the place that the first fell.

He had before him two boxes [of terumah], one of wheat and one of barley, and one of them fell [into a larger container of chullin] and one of them got lost, and it is not known which one fell and which one got lost, both of them are permitted.

[He had] two boxes, one of impure termuah and one of pure terumah, [and] a seah of terumah fell inside one of them, and it is not known into which of them it fell, [he may declare,] "Behold, I say that it fell inside [the box] of impure [terumah]." [However,] the pure [terumah] may not be eaten in [a state of] purity until he calculates that within each separate dough there is less than an egg's bulk. [He had] two boxes, one of impure terumah and one of pure chullin, and a seah of terumah fell inside one of them and it is not known into which of them it fell, [he may declare,] "Behold, I say, it fell inside the impure terumah." [However,] the pure chullin may not be eaten in [a state of] purity until he calculates that within each separate dough there is less than an egg's bulk. [He had] one [box] of pure terumah and one [box] of pure chullin, and a seah of terumah fell inside one of them and it is not known into which of them it fell, both of them are permitted if they have [a sufficient quantity] in them for this to lift up that. Once this lifts up that, he may not eat them in [a state of] purity until he calculates that within each separate dough there is less than an egg's bulk.

He had before him two containers, one of terumah and one of chullin, and in front of them (i.e., the containers) were two seahs [of produce], one of terumah and one of chullin. And [produce] fell from these two inside those two, and it is unknown if this [produce fell] inside that [container], or if that [produce fell] inside this [container], he can operate under the assumption that the terumah [produce] fell inside the terumah [container], and the chullin inside the chullin. If it was untithed produce, first tithe, or second tithe, behold, it is forbidden [to make such an assumption], as we do not permit [a designation of status where there is] a doubt as to whether it is a forbidden mixture, except where there are permissible factors (i.e., at least one scenario in which everything is permissible).* containers permitted, no declaration is allowed. (See Minchat Yitzchak here.)

One who separates terumah and first tithe and second tithe, and does not know which is which, behold, he may measure the terumah, the first tithe, and the second tithe*.