[Avodah] hava amina / mahu d'teima / salka datach amina
micha at aishdas.org
Mon Aug 12 10:58:37 PDT 2019
On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 03:14:57PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote:
> Is there a difference between hava amina, mahu d'teima, and salka datach
I found https://daf-yomi.com/DYItemDetails.aspx?itemId=9708 which discusses
the first two.
Halikhos Olam (R Yeshua b Yosef haLevi, Algeria 1490, subtitled "uMavo
leTalmud") notes that a mahu deteima is somtimes proven dachuq, but not
necessarily dismissed. Whereas a hava amina is never preserved.
The author of the web page, R Yoseif Shimshi (author of GemarOr -- sounds
like guide to learning Shas) wants to suggest his own chiddush:
Mahu detaima is used in response to trying to establish an uqimta
Hava amina is used at the top of the discussion, trying to get what the
tanna's chiddush is (what he's trying to rule out)
Which then leads him to explain why sometimes "tzerikhei" and sometimes
"hava amina", if both are explaining why something a tanna said is a
chiddush. That's at
But I think the difference is obvious -- as RYS notes, tzerikhei is
almost (?) always a pair of quotes that seem to make the same point.
Going back to what you actually asked, RYS discusses salqa da'atakh
(qa salqa da'atakh, i salqa da'atakh and salqa da'atakh amina).
Where he says that the Shelah (Kelalei haTalmud #13) implies that
SDA is used to establish the line of reasoning of the final halakhah.
That's a huge difference in meaning, if SDA flags that the contrary
possibility is the gemara's pesaq!
He closes citing a journal, Sinai #99, saying that:
- i salqa da'atakh raises a legal issue
- salqa de'atakh amina rasies a language issue, a potential
misunderstanding of the statement.
Micha Berger It is a glorious thing to be indifferent to
http://www.aishdas.org/asp suffering, but only to one's own suffering.
Author: Widen Your Tent -Robert Lynd, writer (1879-1949)
More information about the Avodah