More Discussions for this daf
1. Gam Zu l'Tovah 2. Rabbah's meaning 3. Not a Nisayon
4. Tefilah for having a son 5. Birkos ha'Shachar 6. Netilas Yadayim in Mishnah Berurah
7. The prayer for being cured 8. Concluding a blessing with two topics 9. Various questions
10. Machlokes Tana'im 11. Forty days after conception 12. A Woman Who Is "Mazra'as"
13. Leah, Shimon, Dinah 14. Morning Berachos 15. כוונה בשעת הנחת תפילין
DAF DISCUSSIONS - BERACHOS 60

Mike asked:

when the gemara discusses the comparison of the 2 lishnos of the beraissa and how each comports with the positions of the Tanaaim of the quoted mishna, the genara doesnt ask the usual question of "Laima K'Tanaii?" but rather finds it to be an acceptable circumstance to find that the Amoroaim argue in exactly the same dispute of the Tanaaim. The gemara then goes to say that it is shver to understand why it is according to the second Ika Damri to understand the machlokes of the Amoroyim. Why does the gemara abandon the entire issue of "Laima K'Tanaii"?

Could it possibly be because the gemara felt hte question asked was a better one since as Tosfos (59b, D"H V'R' Yochanan) says we pasken like R'Yochanan Aliba D'lishna basra?

The Kollel replies:

Indeed, the Gemara could have asked, "Leima k'Tanai." But since the Gemara wanted to ask a question on both versions, it did not ask "Leima k'Tanai," since that would not be a question on the second version, but rather a refutation of Rebbi Yochanan's opinion. Therefore the Gemara phrased its question the way it did. (When the Gemara says that Rav Huna holds like Rebbi Meir, and so on, it indeed is a weak answer. Here, though, the Gemara had no other answer but this one.)

Kollel Iyun Hadaf