בֵּית סְאָה בִּשְׁבִילָן כַּמָּה הָווּ לְהוּ תְּרֵי אַלְפֵי וַחֲמֵשׁ מְאָה גַּרְמִידֵי לְכׇל חַד כַּמָּה מָטֵי לֵיהּ תַּמְנֵי מְאָה וּתְלָתִין וּתְלָתָא וְתִילְתָּא אַכַּתִּי נְפִישִׁי לֵיהּ דְּעוּלָּא לָא דָּק beit se’a for their sake. How much is that area in cubits? It is 2,500 square cubits. And how much area is that for each of the trees? It is 833⅓. Still, Ulla's amount is greater than this. The Gemara answers: Ulla was not precise in this matter.
אֵימוֹר דְּאָמְרִינַן לָא דָּק לְחוּמְרָא לְקוּלָּא לָא דָּק מִי אָמְרִינַן The Gemara asks: One can say that we say that a Sage was not precise in his measurements when his ruling leads to a stringency; but do we say that he was not precise if his measurements lead to a leniency? According to the previous explanation, Ulla exempts the owner of a tree from first fruits even in a case where his tree does not in fact draw nourishment from his neighbor’s field.
מִי סָבְרַתְּ בְּרִיבּוּעָא קָא אָמְרִינַן בְּעִיגּוּלָא קָא אָמְרִינַן The Gemara answers: Do you maintain that we say the roots extend that far in a square, i.e., one measures sixteen cubits to each side of the tree? Not so; we say this with regard to a circle, that is, the roots extend in a circle surrounding the tree, as the area of a circle is smaller than that of the square circumscribing it.
מִכְּדֵי כַּמָּה מְרוּבָּע יוֹתֵר עַל הָעִיגּוּל רְבִיעַ פָּשׁוּ לְהוּ שְׁבַע מְאָה וְשִׁתִּין וּתְמָנְיָא אַכַּתִּי פָּשׁ לֵיהּ פַּלְגָא דְאַמְּתָא הַיְינוּ דְּלָא דָּק וּלְחוּמְרָא לָא דָּק The Gemara asks: Now, by how much is the area of a square greater than the area of a circle with a diameter the length of the side of that square? It is greater by one-quarter of the area of the circle. If so, 768 square cubits, three-quarters of 1,024, remain for each tree, but there still remains half a cubit more based on the mishna’s calculation. In other words, the measurement would be more accurate if a tree is considered to draw nourishment from a distance of sixteen and a half cubits on each side. The Gemara answers: This is why we said that Ulla was not precise, and he was not precise in a manner that leads to a stringency, as one brings first fruits even from a tree that stands just sixteen cubits from the boundary, rather than 16½.
תָּא שְׁמַע הַקּוֹנֶה אִילָן וְקַרְקָעוֹ מֵבִיא וְקוֹרֵא מַאי לָאו כׇּל שֶׁהוּא לֹא שֵׁשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה The Gemara cites a proof against the opinion of Ulla. Come and hear the following mishna (Bikkurim 1:11): One who buys a tree and its land brings first fruits and recites the requisite Torah verses (Deuteronomy 26:5–11) over them. What, is it not referring to a case where one buys any amount of land with the tree? The Gemara rejects this claim: No; it is referring to a case where one buys sixteen cubits of land around the tree.
תָּא שְׁמַע קָנָה שְׁנֵי אִילָנוֹת בְּתוֹךְ שֶׁל חֲבֵירוֹ מֵבִיא וְאֵינוֹ קוֹרֵא הָא שְׁלֹשָׁה מֵבִיא וְקוֹרֵא מַאי לָאו כׇּל שֶׁהוּא לָא הָכָא נָמֵי שֵׁשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה The Gemara suggests: Come and hear an additional proof from another mishna (Bikkurim 1:6): If one bought two trees in the field of another, he brings first fruits and does not recite the verses, because the land does not belong to him. It may be inferred from here that if he bought three trees he does bring first fruits and recite the verses. What, is it not referring to a case where one buys any amount of land with the trees? The Gemara rejects this claim as well: No; here too it is referring to a case where he acquires sixteen cubits of land around the trees.
תָּא שְׁמַע רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר קַרְקַע כׇּל שֶׁהוּא חַיָּיב בַּפֵּאָה וּבַבִּכּוּרִים וְכוֹתְבִין עָלָיו פְּרוֹזְבּוּל The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a proof from a mishna (Pe’a 3:6). Rabbi Akiva says: The owner of land of any size is obligated in pe’a and in first fruits, and a lender can write a document that prevents the Sabbatical Year from abrogating an outstanding debt [prosbol] for this land, so that loans he provided will not be canceled at the close of the Sabbatical Year,