Study Bava Metzia folio 119A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
And we also learned a case like this in a baraita (Tosefta, Orla 1:4), with regard to the prohibition against eating the fruit of a tree during the first 3 years after its planting [orla]: In the case of a tree that sprouts from the trunk and from the roots of an old tree, its owner is obligated in
The Talmud comments: And both cases are necessary to be stated although they are both based on the same principle. As had it taught us only the first halakha, that of ownership, one could say that it is only with regard to this case that R' Yehuda said his ruling, due to the fact that it pertains to
§ The Mishnah teaches: R' Shimon said: Any vegetables that the owner of the upper garden can stretch out his hand and take, those vegetables are his, and the rest belong to the owner of the lower garden. In the school of R' Yannai they say: And this is only so provided that he does not force himself
Rav Anan, and some say it was R' Yirmeya, raised a dilemma: If the owner of the upper garden can reach its leaves, but he cannot reach its roots, or if he can reach its roots but he cannot reach its leaves, what is the halakha? Is the plant considered to be within his reach or not? No answer was f
Efrayim the scribe, a student of Reish Lakish, says in the name of Reish Lakish: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of R' Shimon. They stated this case before the Persian King Shapur, who expressed an interest in this legal issue, and he said to them: Let us offer praise [apiryon] to R'