Berakhot 60A

מכלל דכי קנה וחזר וקנה, דברי הכל אין צריך לברך.

The Talmud deduces: This proves by inference that if he purchases a new object and then purchases a similar object, everyone agrees that he is not required to recite a blessing, as he has already recited a blessing over the purchase of that type of item.

ואיכא דאמרי: אמר רב הונא: לא שנו אלא שלא קנה וחזר וקנה, אבל קנה וחזר וקנה ⁠— אין צריך לברך. ורבי יוחנן אמר: אפילו קנה חזר וקנה ⁠— צריך לברך. מכלל דכי יש לו וקנה ⁠— דברי הכל צריך לברך.

Some say a different version of this dispute: Rav Huna said: They only taught that one recites the blessing: Who has given us life, on a new vessel if he did not purchase that item in the past and purchased the item now, for the first time. However, if he purchased that item in the past and purchased the item again, he need not recite a blessing. And R' Yoḥanan said: Even if one purchased that item in the past and purchased a similar item again, he must recite a blessing. This proves by inference that if one already has a vessel and then purchased similar vessels, everyone agrees that he must recite a blessing.

מיתיבי: בנה בית חדש ואין לו כיוצא בו, קנה כלים חדשים ואין לו כיוצא בהם ⁠— צריך לברך. יש לו כיוצא בהם ⁠— אין צריך לברך, דברי רבי מאיר. רבי יהודה אומר: בין כך ובין כך צריך לברך.

The Talmud raises an objection based on what was taught in a baraita: One who built a new house and does not already own a similar house, or purchased new vessels and does not already own similar vessels, must recite a blessing. However, if he already owns a similar one, he need not recite a blessing, this is the statement of R' Meir. R' Yehuda, on the other hand, says: In either case, he must recite a blessing.

בשלמא ללישנא קמא ⁠— רב הונא כרבי מאיר, ורבי יוחנן כרבי יהודה. אלא ללישנא בתרא, בשלמא רב הונא כרבי יהודה, אלא רבי יוחנן דאמר כמאן? לא כרבי מאיר ולא כרבי יהודה!

The Talmud asks: Granted, according to the first version of the dispute between Rav Huna and R' Yoḥanan, one could say that Rav Huna holds in accordance with the opinion of R' Meir, and that R' Yoḥanan holds in accordance with the opinion of R' Yehuda. However, according to the latter version of the dispute, granted, Rav Huna holds in accordance with the opinion of R' Yehuda, but in accordance with whose opinion did R' Yoḥanan state his opinion? His statement is neither in accordance with the opinion of R' Meir nor in accordance with the opinion of R' Yehuda.