Beitza 40b : Youtube
Daf TubeYoutube
2 video classes :
Beitza Page 40b

Beitza 40b - Guemara
אלא גרוגרות וצמוקין בלבד איבעית אימא הני נמי כגרוגרות וצמוקין דמי ואיבעית אימא לדבריו דר"ש קאמר וליה לא ס"ל ואיבעית אימא לדבריהם דרבנן קאמר להו לדידי אין מוקצה אלא לדידכו אודו לי מיהת היכא דיוצאות ורועות בפסח ונכנסות ברביעה ראשונה דבייתות הן ואמרו ליה רבנן לא מדבריות הן:
הדרן עלך משילין פירות וסליקא לה מסכת ביצה
Comments from Rashi on Masechet Beitza Page 40b
אלא בגרוגרות וצמוקין . שהן מתחלה ראויין לאכילה והוא דחה אותן בידים להעלותן ליבשן ושוב אינן ראויין עד שייבשו אבל אלו לא דחה אותן בידים ואיכא דאכיל מנייהו הכי קא סלקא דעתיה מדפריש ליה מילתיה דר"ש אלמא כר"ש ס"ל: איבעית אימא הני . מדבריות שאין נכנסות לישוב כלל כגרוגרות וצמוקין דמיין שמקצה אותן מאצלו בידים: ואיבעית אימא . אין מוקצה לר"ש קאמר ליה אבל לדידי יש מוקצה: ואב"א . מתני' לדבריהם דרבנן דאית להו מוקצה קאמר להו:
Beitza 40b - Mishnah translated into english
except for the case of dried figs and raisins in the midst of the drying process alone. These are fruits that are fit to be eaten fresh and were deliberately removed from use to allow them to undergo a drying process, during which time they are inedible; they have therefore been actively removed from one’s mind for the interim. Unripe dates, however, are unfit to be eaten fresh and become fit for eating only when they are ripe. Therefore, if one places unripe dates in a basket to ripen, they are never completely removed from his mind, not having been changed from an edible state to an inedible state, and are permitted. If so, desert animals, which are similarly never completely removed from one’s mind, should also not be considered muktze. Why, then, does Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi indicate that they have the status of muktze?
The Gemara suggests several resolutions: If you wish, say that these desert animals are also considered similar to dried figs and raisins, as by sending them outside the town the owner has actively removed them from use. And if you wish, say instead that the fact that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi told his son that Rabbi Shimon does not accept the halakha of muktze except for the case of dried figs and raisins does not prove anything about his own opinion; he stated this only in accordance with the statement of Rabbi Shimon, but he himself does not hold accordingly.
And if you wish, say a different answer: He himself, like Rabbi Shimon, did not accept the concept of muktze, and when he spoke in the baraita he was speaking, for the sake of argument, in accordance with the words of the Rabbis who had spoken before him, saying to them, in effect: According to my opinion, there is no halakha of muktze at all, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, and all animals may be slaughtered on the Festival. But even according to your approach, that there is a halakha of muktze, agree with me, in any event, that with regard to a case where they go out and graze on Passover and enter again at the first rainfall, they are considered domestic animals and should be permitted. But the Rabbis said to him: No, even those are desert animals.
Traduction : The William Davidson digital edition of the Koren Noé Talmud, with commentary by Rabbi Adin Even-Israel Steinsaltz.
Talmud Bavli