Pesachim 23A

לרבים. רבי יהודה אומר: להוציא את הנטוע לרבים.

for the public; all the details of the prohibition of orla apply to a tree planted for public purposes. R' Yehuda says: This verse comes to exclude a tree planted for the public, i.e., it is exempt from the laws of orla.

מאי טעמא דתנא קמא ⁠— דכתיב ״ונטעתם״, ליחיד משמע, לרבים לא משמע. כתב רחמנא ״לכם״⁠ — להביא את הנטוע לרבים. ורבי יהודה: ״ונטעתם״ משמע בין לרבים בין ליחיד, ו״לכם״ בין יחיד בין רבים משמע. הוי רבוי אחר רבוי ⁠— ואין רבוי אחר רבוי אלא למעט.

The Talmud explains: What is the reason for the opinion of the first tanna? As it is written: “And you should plant.” That the mitzva applies to an individual is indicated, since planting a tree is ordinarily an individual activity; however, that the mitzva of orla applies to a tree planted for the public is not indicated by the verse. Therefore, God writes “for you” in the plural, to include within this prohibition that which is planted for the public. And R' Yehuda concedes that the phrase “and you should plant” indicates that orla applies both to a tree planted for the public and for an individual; and the phrase “for you” also indicates that orla applies both to a tree planted for an individual and for the public. If so, then this is one amplificatory expression after another, and there is a principle that one amplificatory expression after another is restrictive. Therefore, the term: “For you” comes to exclude from this prohibition a tree planted for the public.

והרי תרומה, דרחמנא אמר: ״וכל זר לא יאכל קדש״, ותנן: מערבין לנזיר ביין, ולישראל בתרומה!

The Talmud further challenges R' Abbahu’s opinion: And yet there is the prohibition that a non-priest should not eat teruma, as God says: “No stranger should eat of the sacred food; a tenant of a priest, or a hired servant, should not eat of the sacred food” (Leviticus 22:10). And we learned in a Mishnah: One may establish an eiruv, such as a joining of Shabbat boundaries, on behalf of a nazirite with wine, even though he may not drink it. And one may establish an eiruv on behalf of an Israelite with teruma, although it is prohibited for him to eat it. Apparently, it is permitted for an Israelite to derive benefit from the teruma even though the verse says: “He should not eat.” This appears to be a challenge to the opinion of R' Abbahu.