Bava Batra 70A

ודייני גולה אמרי: כל שהעול כובשו ⁠– לא הוי שיור, כל שאין העול כובשו ⁠– הוי שיור. ולא פליגי ⁠– הא בדיקלי, הא באילני.

But the judges of the exile, Shmuel and Karna, say: Any tree that is bent back by the yoke of oxen as the animals plow the ground under the tree, and in this way the tree does not impede the plowing, is not retained by the seller, as it is not a significant tree. Any tree that is not bent back by the yoke of the oxen is retained by the seller and not included in the sale. The Talmud comments: And these amora’im do not disagree with regard to the halakha: That which Rav said, that the only trees that the seller retains for himself and excludes from the sale are those that must be climbed by means of a rope, was said with regard to palm trees, while that which the judges of the exile said, that the only trees that are retained are those that are not bent back by the yoke of the oxen, was said with regard to other types of trees.

בעא מיניה רב אחא בר הונא מרב ששת: ״חוץ מחרוב פלוני״, ״חוץ מסדן פלוני״, מהו? אותו חרוב הוא דלא קני, הא שאר חרובים קני; או דלמא, שאר חרובין נמי לא קני? אמר ליה: לא קנה.

§ The Talmud cites a discussion related to the Mishnah’s ruling that a grafted carob tree and a sycamore trunk are not included in the sale of the field: Rav Aḥa bar Huna raised a dilemma before Rav Sheshet: If one selling a field said to the buyer: I am selling you the entire field except for such and such grafted carob tree, or except for such and such sycamore trunk, and there were other grafted carob trees or sycamore trunks in the field, what is the halakha? The Talmud explains the two sides of the question: Does the seller mean to say that it is this carob tree that the buyer does not acquire, but he does acquire the other carob trees, or perhaps he means that he also does not acquire the rest of the carob trees? Rav Sheshet said to him in response: The buyer does not acquire any of them.