Question: Perhaps if she checked in [Bein ha'Shemashos] of R. Yosi, but not in that of R. Yehudah, we are not concerned, for Bein ha'Shemashos of R. Yehudah is day!

Answer: Regarding this, R. Yehudah ben Agra admits that we are not concerned, since she checked in that of R. Yosi.

Observation: In several places we answer like here.

Implied question: In Bava Metzi'a (54a), regarding Chomesh and Ma'aser, and in Chulin (109a) regarding Efshar Lesochto (a piece that became forbidden due to absorptions), we do not answer like this!

Answer: That is because we can resolve differently, through a small change in the text.

Question: Below (68b), R. Yosi himself said that she is in her Chazakah!

Answer #1: There, we discuss when she checked on the second or third day and found that she is Tehorah, for she stopped [seeing]. Here, she did not check.

Answer #2: Here, she checked in the morning of the seventh day and found that she is Teme'ah.

Observation: Now, we could have asked that he cited R. Yosi. (Surely R. Yosi is concerned for his own Bein ha'Shemashos!)

Question: We should infer that R. Yehudah ben Agra holds that if she checked only in R. Yosi's Bein ha'Shemashos, she is not concerned, and Rebbi holds that she is concerned, since she did not check in R. Yehudah's Bein ha'Shemashos;

This is because R. Yosi's Bein ha'Shemashos is included in R. Yehudah's, like it says at the end [of this Sugya].

Strengthening of question: If we would say so, we would not need to say that two Tana'im argue about the opinion of R. Yehudah ben Agra!

Answer: [We assume that this Beraisa] is like the Beraisa above, in which R. Yehudah ben Agra discusses when she checked in R. Yehudah's Bein ha'Shemashos, but did not check in R. Yosi's.

Explanation #1 (Rashi): She herself [is Teme'ah retroactively] regarding Taharos.

Question: Why did we need to teach Kodshim? [If she is Teme'ah regarding Taharos,] all the more so regarding Kodshim!

Answer #1: He said so due to R. Shimon ben Elazar, who concludes that she is not Metamei even Kodshim.

Answer #2: He taught Kodshim to reveal about herself, that even for Taharos [she is Teme'ah].

Objection #1: The word "herself" does not connote for Taharos!

Objection #2: According to R. Shimon ben Elazar, still, her Kesem (stain) is more stringent than her sighting!

He himself said below that she is Toleh (attributes) to what she saw that day, but a Kesem she found the day before her sighting, she is Teme'ah retroactively and confused about her count from the time she laundered [the garment on which the Kesem was found].

Answer: "Herself" means that she is confused about her count from the time she laundered;

R. Shimon ben Elazar argues about both of them. She is not confused about her count, and she is Metamei Kodshim only me'Es la'Es.

Implied question: Why does R. Shimon ben Elazar say below that she is Toleh a Kesem to a sighting that day, which implies that a Kesem from yesterday she is not Toleh?

Answer: It is not because she is confused about her count due to yesterday's Kesem from the time of laundering;

Rather, through the sighting today and yesterday's Kesem she is confused, for she does not know whether to count from today, or from [yesterday, the day she found] the Kesem.

Question: Still, her Kesem is more stringent than her sighting!

Due to her Kesem, she is confused in her count me'Es la'Es. Regarding her sighting, even though for Kodshim and Taharos she is Metamei [retroactively] me'Es la'Es, she is not confused, for she counts from the day she saw!

Answer: R. Shimon ben Elazar is concerned only that her Kesem not be more stringent than her sighting regarding time, to be Metamei more than 24 hours [retroactively].

Explanation #1 (Rashi): [The text should say] "my words are more reasonable than his words."

Explanation #2: We must switch, [and say] that he ruins her, and I fix her, and the one who is stringent is preferable.

Explanation #1 (Rashi): According to R. Shimon, if she saw on days eight, nine and 10 from her Kesem, she is not a Zavah, and according to Rebbi, who says that she is Toleh her Kesem on her sighting, she is a Zavah!

Rebuttal: This is wrong. Also according to R. Shimon she is confused about her count, like I explained above;

Just the contrary, R. Shimon is more stringent! He is Metamei her me'Es la'Es from when she found the Kesem.

Explanation #1 (cont. - Rashi): According to Rebbi, she immerses on [the night after] the seventh day from her Kesem.

Rebuttal: One may not be so lenient. We do not attribute her Kesem to her sighting [to say that she Vadai began Nidah from the time of the Kesem].

Explanation #2 (R. Chananel): When she found the Kesem on the day of the sighting, according to Rebbi, who is Toleh her Kesem all 24 hours on her sighting, she is confused for all 24 hours. It is as if she saw two days - the day of the sighting and the day before;

If she saw also the next day, she is a Zavah, if she was in the days of Zivah.

According to R. Shimon, it depends only on days. If so, we do not consider it as if she saw yesterday, and she is not a Zavah until she sees another two days.

Support: This is why he says that R. Shimon fixes her and Rebbi ruins her, for R. Shimon is more lenient.

Disclaimer: However, if she saw today and yesterday, and found a Kesem, R. Shimon is stringent, like we explained.

Explanation #1 (Rashi): She needs to check [that she is clean now] on the seventh day from her Kesem in order to immerse at night;

According to Reish Lakish, if she checked on the seventh day from her Kesem, she revealed her intent that her Kesem is due to her sighting;

However, if she did not check, she counts from her sighting. He explained so according to his opinion.

Rebuttal #1: This is wrong. She may not immerse on the eighth night from her Kesem, for Rebbi did not say that we Vadai attribute her Kesem to her sighting. Rather, it is a Safek, like I explained.

Rebuttal #2: How is it proven from here that for a Kesem, she needs to check on the seventh day? Here is different, for she saw a Vadai sighting!

Rebuttal #3: Just the contrary! Since R. Yochanan said that even though she did not check on the seventh day, she may immerse at night, if so she need not check!

Explanation #2: Rather, she needs Hafsakas Taharah between laundering and finding the Kesem;

Perhaps Rebbi attributes her Kesem on her sighting, and he is not Metamei from the time of laundering, i.e. when she checked between laundering and finding the Kesem;

Reish Lakish said "this is when she checked", i.e. close to the time she found the Kesem, within 24 hours;

However, if there are 24 hours between checking and finding the Kesem, we are Metamei her retroactively until the time of checking.

R. Yochanan said "even though she did not check", i.e. close [to finding the Kesem]. Rather, there were 24 hours between checking and finding;

Even so, we attribute the Kesem to her sighting, since there is no [retroactive Tum'ah] from the time of laundering, also there are not 24 hours [of retroactive Tum'ah].

Inference: All agree that she needs Hefsek;

It is improper to say that according to R. Yochanan, he said [that we attribute the Kesem to her sighting] even though she did not check at all. He would not argue so much with Reish Lakish.