אֶלָּא גְּרוֹגָרוֹת וְצִמּוּקִין בִּלְבָד.

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 ?

אִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: הָנֵי נַמִי כִּגְרוֹגָרוֹת וְצִמּוּקִין דָּמֵי. וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: לִדְבָרָיו דְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן קָאָמַר, וְלֵיהּ לָא סְבִירָא לֵיהּ.

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.

וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: לְדִבְרֵיהֶם דְּרַבָּנַן קָאָמַר לְהוּ: לְדִידִי – אֵין מוּקְצֶה, אֶלָּא לְדִידְכוּ – אוֹדוּ לִי מִיהַת הֵיכָא דְּיוֹצְאוֹת וְרוֹעוֹת בְּפֶסַח וְנִכְנָסוֹת בִּרְבִיעָה רִאשׁוֹנָה דְּבַיָּיתוֹת הֵן. וַאֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ רַבָּנַן: לָא, מִדְבָּרִיּוֹת הֵן. הדרן עלך משילין פירות וסליקא מסכת ביצה

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.