בבא בתרא ל''ו ע''ב תוספות. עולא אומר הוא עץ בבעלותו של אדם שהוא בתוך י''ו אמות של גבול של שכן אינו יכול להביא ביכורים מהעץ בגלל השורשים שהולכים שש עשרה אמות. הגמרא מנסה למצוא מאיפה זה נובע. אם משנת עשר נטיעות (שתילים) בשדה חמישים על חמישים זה משאיר לכל אילן עם רק תשע אמות. אז הם מנסים עוד משנה עם שלשת עצים הגדלים באותה חמישים על חמישים, וכי מיתברר שזה קרוב
Ula said a tree needs to be more than 16 amot away from the border of a neighbor in order to bring the first fruits from it. The idea is that any closer than that is like the tree is deriving sustenance from the neighbors field and it is not פרי אדמתך "the fruit of your field". The Gemara tries to find from where this law comes from. At first they suggest the mishna of עשר נטיעות. But that does not work because that only gives you up to 8 amot for each sapling. Then the find another mishna about three trees in a area 2500 square amot.
It occurs to me to wonder if we are thinking (that is the Gemara is thinking) that the law of Ula comes from the Mishna about 3 trees in a field that is 2500 square amot then why did not Ula mention that if the fruit bearing trees are not actually full grown but just נטיעות then the amount of space between them and the boundary of the neighbor is less. That is just 8 amot. The reason is that is the distance that come out of the Mishna about ten נטיעות for the field of 2500 square amot.
In another words Ula should have more lenient with נטיעות and said that נטיעות do not forbid up until 16 amot but only up until 8 amot?
Ula said a tree needs to be more than 16 amot away from the border of a neighbor in order to bring the first fruits from it. The idea is that any closer than that is like the tree is deriving sustenance from the neighbors field and it is not פרי אדמתך "the fruit of your field". The Gemara tries to find from where this law comes from. At first they suggest the mishna of עשר נטיעות. But that does not work because that only gives you up to 8 amot for each sapling. Then the find another mishna about three trees in a area 2500 square amot.
It occurs to me to wonder if we are thinking (that is the Gemara is thinking) that the law of Ula comes from the Mishna about 3 trees in a field that is 2500 square amot then why did not Ula mention that if the fruit bearing trees are not actually full grown but just נטיעות then the amount of space between them and the boundary of the neighbor is less. That is just 8 amot. The reason is that is the distance that come out of the Mishna about ten נטיעות for the field of 2500 square amot.
In another words Ula should have more lenient with נטיעות and said that נטיעות do not forbid up until 16 amot but only up until 8 amot?
