BINAH: YESHIVAT HAVERIM יְשִׁיבָה חברים – BABYLONIAN TALMUD p78

But does not R. Simeon hold that the
same is the case with other things which were designated for their religious purposes? Is it not a
fact that the ornaments of the tabernacle on that festival must not be used, even in accordance
with R. Simeon’s theory? As R. Hyya b. R. Joseph taught in the presence of R. Johanan: “One
must not remove wood from a booth on any biblical feast day, but he may remove it from any
place near by? R. Simeon, however, permits this to be done. Still, they all agree that wood must
not be removed from a booth built expressly for that feast, on all the seven feast days. However,
if there was a stipulation it may be done accordingly” (because the wood is set aside for the
ritual purpose). Hence even according to him the designation for ritual purposes must not be
used. Why, then, is this different from the oil in question? The Boraitha is to be understood thus:
All the ornaments of the booth in question are prohibited so far as all things bearing similitude
to the oil in the burning lamp are concerned. And so also it was taught by R. Hyya b. Ahba in
the name of R. Johanan, that there is no Muktza in the theory of R. Simeon, but in cases which
are similar to the oil of the lamp while burning, being designated for the ritual purpose, they are
also designated not to be used. Said R. Jehudah in the name of Samuel: “In the opinion of R.
Simeon no law of Muktza exists except in the case of raisins and dates which were placed on the
roof to be dried.” (In such a case there certainly was no intention to use them on the same
Sabbath.) Said Rabba b. b. Hana in the name of R. Johanan: “It was said the law remains in
accordance with R. Simeon. When R. Itz’hak b. R. Joseph, however, came from Palestine, he
said in the name of R. Johanan that the law (of Muktza) according to R. Jehudah prevails, and R.
Jehoshua b. Levi said the law prevails with R. Simeon. Said R. Joseph: Now is understood what
Rabba b. b. Hana said in name of R. Johanan, it was said that the Halakha. prevails according to
R. Simeon, which means that R. Johanan himself did not agree with their decision. Said Abayi
to R. Joseph: “Didst thou not know before this that R. Johanan holds with the opinion of R.
Jehudah? Is it not a fact that when R. Abba and R. Assi met in the house of R. Abba of the city
of Heifa, and a candelabrum fell upon the coat of R. Assi, he (R. Assi) did not remove it? Was it
not because he was a disciple of R. Johanan and acted according to the opinion of his master?”
Answered R. Joseph: “Thou art speaking of a candelabrum.