Question: Rav should rather say that we learn from our Mishnah that Ayo's Beraisa is mistaken! (Mishnayos are more authoritative than Beraisos.)

Answer: We have another source that R. Yehudah holds Ein Breirah:

(Beraisa #1 - R. Meir): If one bought [100 Lugim of] wine from Kusim [and lacks Kelim into which to put the tithes], he says 'the two Lugim that I will separate later should be Terumah. Ten Lugim [that I will separate] are Ma'aser Rishon, and nine Lugim are Ma'aser Sheni.' He (Rashi - redeems the Ma'aser Sheni and) may drink immediately;

R. Yehudah, R. Yosi and R. Shimon forbid.

(Ula): Beraisa #1 teaches that Ayo's Beraisa is mistaken.

Question: R. Yehudah holds Ein Breirah in Beraisa #1 (it supports Ayo)!

Answer #1: Ula's text of Beraisa #1 puts R. Yehudah with R. Meir. I.e. R. Meir and R. Yehudah permit, and R. Yosi and R. Shimon forbid. (On Amud B we will give other answers to every question based on Beraisa #1.)

Question: R. Yosi holds Yesh Breirah!

(Mishnah - R. Yosi): If each of two women are obligated to offer a Kan (Chatas ha'Of and Olas ha'Of) and they bought four birds together, or gave money together to a Kohen [to buy and offer four birds], the Kohen may offer any [two] birds for Chata'os and the others for Olos [one of each for each woman. We say retroactively that each bird offered for each woman belonged to her. This relies on Breirah!]

Answer #1 (Rabah): No, the case is, they stipulated [Ri - which bird belongs to each woman. The birds were never mixed up.]

Objection: If so, this is obvious!

Answer: It teaches Rav Chisda's law (Ri - and that we do not decree due to when they did not stipulate, for then Breirah would be required).

(Rav Chisda): A Kan becomes specified (which is the Chatas and which is the Olah) only [by the owner] at the time he bought it, or [if he did not specify then, by the Kohen] when the Kohen offers it [even if the owner later tried to specify it].

Question: Elsewhere, R. Yosi holds Yesh Breirah!

(Mishnah - R. Yosi): If [Reuven,] an Am ha'Aretz [who is not trustworthy about Ma'aser] asked a Chaver (Shimon) to buy an [extra] bundle of vegetables or bun for him [and Shimon bought for himself and Reuven from an Am ha'Aretz], Shimon need not tithe [what he gives to Reuven. We say that retroactively, what he gives to Reuven was never his. He was a mere Shali'ach to buy it for him. The others he bought for himself];

Chachamim say, he must tithe it.

Answer #1: The opinions must be switched.

Question (Beraisa #2 - R. Yosi): If one declares 'my Ma'aser is redeemed on the first coin that I will pull out of my wallet', it takes effect.

Correction: It should say 'it does not take effect.'

Question: Why switch two (that Mishnah and Beraisa) due to one (Beraisa #1)? It is better to switch one due to two!

Answer: Surely, Beraisa #2 must be switched!

(Seifa of Beraisa #2): R. Yosi agrees that if one declares 'the Ma'aser in my house is redeemed on the new coin that I will pull out of my wallet', it is redeemed.

Since here R. Yosi says 'it is redeemed', this implies that above he says that it is not redeemed!

Question: What is the case of a new coin?

If there is more than one new coin in the wallet, this is just like the Reisha!

Answer: There is only one new coin.

Question: If so, why does it say 'that I will pull out of my wallet'? (This does not affect the redemption!)

Answer: This is merely for consistency with the Reisha, which discusses pulling out a coin [among several coins].

Question (Rava): Who is the Tana of the following Beraisa, who holds that Ein Breirah even regarding mid'Rabanan laws?

(Beraisa): If Reuven said to five people 'I will be Me'arev for whichever of you that I desire. The one I pick will go':

If he decided before Shabbos, the Eruv works [for that person]. If not, it does not.

Rav Nachman could not answer.

Question: Why didn't he say that it is the Tana of Ayo's Beraisa?

Answer: He had not heard the Beraisa.

(Rav Yosef): Tana'im argue about this (whether or not Yesh Breirah):

(Beraisa): If one said 'I will be Me'arev for every Shabbos of the year that I will want to go', if he decided before Shabbos, the Eruv is valid for that Shabbos;

R. Shimon says, [even] if he decided after dark it is valid;

Chachamim say, in this case it is invalid.

Question: R. Shimon contradicts himself. Elsewhere (Mishnah #1), he holds that Ein Breirah!

Answer #1: The opinions in the Beraisa must be switched.

Question: Why must we switch the opinions? Perhaps R. Shimon holds that Yesh Breirah for mid'Rabanan laws, but Ein Breirah for mid'Oraisa laws!

Answer: Rav Yosef holds that the Tana'im do not distinguish between mid'Oraisa and mid'Rabanan regarding Breirah.

Answer #2 (to every question based on Beraisa #1): Normally, they (R. Yehudah, R. Yosi and R. Shimon) hold that Yesh Breirah. Terumah is different, for "Reishis [Deganecha...]" teaches that the remnants after taking Reishis (Terumah) must be recognizable [at the time of separation].

Question (Abaye): If so, if one had two pomegranates of Tevel and said 'if it will rain today, this one should be Terumah on the other, and if not, vice-versa', will you say that nothing happens whether or not it rains?

Suggestion: Indeed, this is true!

Rejection (Mishnah - R. Shimon): If one said 'the Terumah for this pile is inside it, and the Ma'aseros are inside it, and Terumas Ma'aser is inside it, this takes effect [even though we do not know where they are].

Answer: There, remnants are recognizable. The outside of the pile is Chulin! (He declared the tithes to be inside.)

Answer #3 (to the questions based on Beraisa #1): A Beraisa teaches that they agree that Yesh Breirah. (They forbid for a different reason):

(Beraisa - R. Yehudah, R. Yosi and R. Shimon, to R. Meir): Aren't you concerned lest the barrel break, and retroactively he drank Tevel [for he will never be able to separate the tithes]?

R. Meir: Until it breaks, we are not concerned.

Question: According to Answer #2 (the remnants must be recognizable), how do we understand their challenge to R. Meir?

Answer: They say 'we say that the remnants must be recognizable, so this does not work at all;

Even you should forbid, lest the barrel break, and he will have drunk Tevel retroactively!'

R. Meir answered that until it breaks, we are not concerned.