1. חטין וזרען בקרקע
Rava asked: חטין וזרען בקרקע – regarding wheat kernels which one planted in the ground, עומר מתירן – does the omer permit them or not? The Gemara explains that the kernels were harvested and replanted, and the עומר was offered before they took root. Can they be taken out and eaten? Are they כמאן דשדייא בכדא דמיא – as if they were thrown into a container, and the עומר permits them, or perhaps בטיל להו לגבי ארעא – he subordinated them to the land, and they are considered plants, so the עומר can only permit them after they take root? This question is asked regarding two other halachos: (1) Would they be subject to the laws of אונאה, like מטלטלין, or not, like קרקע? The Gemara clarifies that if the seller planted less than he claimed in the land being sold, the sale can be voided (as a mistaken sale) even if the kernels are considered land, and even for less than the rate of אונאה. Rather, the case is where he claimed to have adequately planted the field, but he did not (which may be based on a mistaken estimate). (2) Would one make a shevuah (e.g., for מודה במקצת) on planted grain, or is it exempt like land? All these questions remain unresolved.
2. An elephant swallowed palm fibers and expelled them, and they were made into a basket
Rami bar Chama asked: פיל שבלע כפיפה מצרית – if an elephant swallowed a palm-fiber basket, והקיאה דרך בית הרעי – and expelled it through its rectum, what is its halachah? The Gemara wonders regarding what halachah this question was asked. It cannot be למבטל טומאתה – to nullify its tumah (by losing its status as a utensil), because a כלי only loses its tumah status בשינוי מעשה – through physical change, and this basket remained intact!? Rather, the case is דבלע הוצין – that it swallowed palm fibers and expelled them, ועבדינהו כפיפה מצרית – which one then made into a palm-fiber basket. Is this considered עיכול – digestion, in which case the basket would be ככלי גללים – like utensils made of dung, which are not susceptible to tumah (even Rabbinically), or is it not considered עיכול? The Gemara attempts to resolve this question from an incident in which wolves swallowed two children and excreted them whole. The Sages ruled the bodies tahor (and halachically like dung), proving this is considered עיכול. However, the Gemara says that only flesh is considered digested, דרכיך – because it is soft, as opposed to palm fibers. The Gemara also rejects proving the opposite from the Sages’ ruling that the children’s bones remained tamei, because bones are especially hard.
3. Using wheat which descended from clouds for the שתי הלחם
Rebbe Zeira asked: חיטין שירדו בעבים מהו – wheat kernels which descended from the clouds with the rain, what is their halachah? Rashi explains that clouds took up water from the ocean and swept up a ship full of wheat. The Gemara explains that they can certainly be used for ordinary menachos, and Rebbe Zeira’s inquiry was about using them for the שתי הלחם. When the Torah required that the שתי הלחם should be brought "ממושבותיכם" – from your dwelling places, was it only excluding wheat from חוץ לארץ, but wheat from clouds may be used, or must it literally come from your dwelling places, and even wheat descended from clouds are invalid for the שתי הלחם? The Gemara wonders if such an occurrence ever takes place, and reports an incident with an Arab for whom wheat descended a כיזבא (about a tefach) high over an area three פרסה across.