Commentary for Kiddushin 116:7
ואיבעית אימא דכולי עלמא אית להו דשמואל והכא היינו טעמא דרבי יוסי בר' יהודה דקנסוהו רבנן לבעל הבית דלא איבעי ליה לשהויה לטיבליה
Here, however, they differ in respect to Samuel's dictum, for Samuel said: One grain of wheat frees the whole stack:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [The removal of one single grain is sufficient to raise the prohibition that rests on the stack, as far as a non-priest is concerned, though the precept of 'giving' terumah is not fulfilled except on setting aside for the priest an amount varying between one fortieth to one sixtieth.]');"><sup>7</sup></span> One Master accepts Samuel's ruling; the other does not accept it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is now understood that the reference is to one's ordinary produce, not to a legacy. Now, Rabbi agrees with Samuel: hence the robbed person can say: 'It was all mine, for I would have separated only one grain.' According to this, the controversy refers only to the value of terumah, which, notwithstanding Samuel's dictum, varied from one fortieth to one sixtieth. But the thief is certainly not liable for the tithe it contains, on all views, since that must be one tenth.');"><sup>8</sup></span>