Talmud for Peah 4:15

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish objected to Rebbi Joḥanan¹⁰⁶The argument makes sense only as objection from R. Joḥanan to R. Simeon ben Laqish. It seems that Maimonides read in the first paragraph “Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish objected to Rebbi Joḥanan” and in the second “Rebbi Joḥanan objected to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish” since in his Code (Ma‘serot 3:7) he follows R. Joḥanan which probably he would not have done if R. Joḥanan disagreed with R. Yose, the preeminent Tanna.: Did we not state¹⁰⁷Mishnah Peah 4:5 (Note 81), about a field dedicated to the Temple and then redeemed.: “But if he dedicated it before it was finished, the treasurer finished it, and then the owner redeemed it, it is free.” Is not the treasurer a different person and you say what he did is valid? He said to him, this follows him who says the treasurer has the status of owner and against Rebbi Yose since Rebbi Yose said, the treasurer is a different person.