כסיתא איכא דאמרי ערונים ערמונים אלמוגים ערונים ערי ערמונים דולבי אלמוגים כסיתא:
refers to coral trees [kasita]. There are those who say that the other three are as follows: Aronim, armonim, and almugim. Aronim refers to laurel trees [arei], armonim to plane trees [dulevei], and almugim to coral trees [kasita].
מתני׳ הקונה שני אילנות בתוך שדה חבירו הרי זה לא קנה קרקע רבי מאיר אומר קנה קרקע הגדילו לא ישפה והעולה מן הגזע שלו ומן השרשים של בעל הקרקע ואם מתו אין לו קרקע
MISHNA: With regard to one who buys two trees in the field of another, this one has not acquired any ground, but only the trees. Rabbi Meir says: He has acquired the ground under them. The mishna states a halakha in accordance with the opinion of the first tanna: If the trees grew, the owner of the field may not cut down their branches, despite the fact that their shade damages his field. And that which grows out of the trunk is his, i.e., it belongs to the owner of the tree, but that which grows out of the roots belongs to the owner of the ground. And if the trees died, their owner has no rights to the ground where the trees had stood.
קנה שלשה קנה קרקע הגדילו ישפה והעולה מן הגזע ומן השרשין שלו ואם מתו יש לו קרקע:
If one bought three trees, he has acquired the ground along with them. If they grew, the owner of the field may cut down their branches, as he sold a specific piece of land along with the trees, not his entire field. And that which grows out of the trunk and out of the roots is his, i.e., it belongs to the owner of the trees. And if the trees died, the owner of the trees still has possession of the ground, as it was sold along with the trees.
גמ׳ תנן התם הקונה שני אילנות בתוך של חבירו מביא ואינו קורא ר"מ אומר מביא וקורא
GEMARA: We learned in a mishna elsewhere (Bikkurim 1:6): With regard to one who buys two trees in the field of another, he brings the first fruits but does not recite the passages of thanks to God that appear in the Torah (Deuteronomy 26:1–11), as the land does not belong to him and therefore he cannot state: “I have brought the first of the fruit of the land, which You, Lord, have given me” (Deuteronomy 26:10). Rabbi Meir says: He brings the first fruits and also recites the passage.
אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל מחייב היה ר"מ אף בלוקח פירות מן השוק ממאי מדקתני משנה יתירא מכדי תנא ליה דיש לו קרקע פשיטא דמביא וקורא
Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: Rabbi Meir would obligate even one who buys fruit from the marketplace to bring first fruits, not only one who grew the fruits on his own tree. From where did he derive this halakha? From the fact that the tanna teaches an apparently superfluous mishna. Since Rabbi Meir already taught in the mishna here that the owner of two trees has possession of the ground, isn’t it obvious that he brings first fruits and recites the passage? What is added by his statement in the mishna in Bikkurim?
אלא ש"מ מחייב היה ר"מ אף בלוקח פירות מן השוק
Rather, learn from the mishna in Bikkurim that Rabbi Meir would obligate even one who buys fruit from the marketplace to bring first fruits to the Temple. Rabbi Meir is saying that even if the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis that one who buys two trees does not own the ground between them, he still must bring the first fruits and recite the passage of thanks.
והא כתיב (דברים כו, ב) אשר תביא מארצך ההוא למעוטי חוצה לארץ
The Gemara asks: But isn’t it written: “Which you shall bring in from your land” (Deuteronomy 26:2)? This verse indicates that the fruit must be the produce of your land, not land that belongs to another. The Gemara answers: That verse serves to exclude land that is outside of Eretz Yisrael, which is not the land of the Jewish people. It does not exclude land that does not belong to that specific individual.
והא כתיב (שמות כג, יט) אדמתך למעוטי אדמת עכו"ם והכתיב אשר נתתה לי דיהבת לי זוזי וזבני בהו
The Gemara asks: But isn’t it written: “The choicest first fruits of your land you shall bring” (Exodus 23:19)? The Gemara answers: This serves to exclude fruit bought by a Jew that was grown on the land of a gentile in Eretz Yisrael. The Gemara asks: But isn’t it written: “I have brought the first of the fruit of the land, which You, Lord, have given me” (Deuteronomy 26:10)? If he purchased the fruit, then the land on which it grew was not given to him by God. The Gemara answers that the phrase “which You have given me” can mean that You have given me money, and with that money I bought this fruit.
מתיב רבה הקונה אילן אחד בתוך של חבירו מביא ואינו קורא לפי שלא קנה קרקע דברי ר"מ תיובתא
Rabba raises an objection to the opinion of Shmuel from a baraita: One who buys one tree in the field of another brings first fruits but does not recite the passage, as he did not acquire any land; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. This is a conclusive refutation of Shmuel’s opinion, as he said that according to Rabbi Meir even one who simply purchases fruit is obligated to bring first fruits to the Temple.
א"ל ר"ש בן אליקים לר' אלעזר
Apropos the discussion of the obligation to bring first fruits of one who buys a tree in the field of another, Rabbi Shimon ben Elyakim said to Rabbi Elazar: