One who smooths another person's pile without his consent - R. Yochanan and R. Shimon ben Lakish disagreed - R. Yochanan said that it becomes Tevel and R. Shimon ben Lakish said that it does not.

Question (R. Shimon ben Lakish to R. Yochanan) (Mishnah in Maseches Challah): Similarly, women who gave flour to a baker to make dough (that they could then knead and have it rise at home), if none of them have the minimum amount of dough for separating Challah, they are all exempt from Challah...? (According to R. Yochanan, if the baker combined their doughs without their consent, why isn't it obligated in Challah?)

Answer (R. Yochanan): Since dough that is intended to be divided is exempt from Challah.

Question (Next Mishnah in Challah): If a baker made dough to divide up (to sell to different people), it is obligated in Challah.

Answer (R. Yochanan): Don't ask from a baker - a baker's intent is irrelevant - it depends on whether he has buyers who will take it home and make it Tevel.

Question (R. Shimon ben Lakish to R. Yochanan) (Previous Mishnah): 'Ant holes that remained overnight next to a pile of grain that was obligated in Ma'asros - the grain inside them is obligated.' This implies that had it been next to a pile that was exempt, the grain in the ant hole is exempt...? (Since it's normal for ants to bring in the seeds from the stalks, it's as if the ants have completed the seeds without the consent of the owner; so why is it not obligated in Ma'asros?)

Answer (R. Yona citing R. Abahu citing R. Yochanan): It's exempt because the owner has given up on retrieving the grain dragged away by the ants.

Rebuttal (Shmuel bar Abba): The ants dragged kernels together with their straw (so they weren't yet completed).

Question (R. Shimon ben Lakish to R. Yochanan) (Mishnah in Peah): 'If he consecrated them before they were completed and they were completed by the Temple treasurer and then redeemed, they are exempt.' Isn't the treasurer considered like another person (completing them, rather than the owner), but the Mishnah still taught that they become exempt...?

Answer (R. Yochanan to R. Shimon ben Lakish): It follows the opinion that the treasurer is considered the owner, which is unlike R. Yosi who said that he is like another person.

Question (R. Chananya, a colleague of the Rabbanan): (Concerning the Mishnah quoted earlier (see above (b)) about women who gave their flour to a baker, it was taught that if none of them have the minimum amount of dough for separating Challah, they are all exempt.) But even if each did have the minimum amount, they would still be exempt, as they would be considered like produce that is incomplete...

Explanation (R. Yosi citing R. Zeira citing R. Elazar): Wine taken from a winepress - even that which is in the flask didn't become Tevel, because it will be returned into produce that is not yet complete. (Since the dough will be mixed with an incomplete product, it is exempt.)