(Beraisa): A female convert, captive or Shifchah who was redeemed, converted or was freed, she must wait three months [to avoid a Safek about whether or not the child was conceived in Kedushah]. R. Yehudah says so;

R. Yosi says, they need not wait.

Regarding blood, R. Yehudah says that [one who converted] is Metamei me'Es la'Es (24 hours retroactively from when she saw blood. R. Yosi says, she is Dayah Shaitah (she is not Metamei retroactively at all. AMUDEI YERUSHALAYIM - surely we do not Metamei from before she converted, for a Nochri is not Mekabel Tum'ah! Rather, they argue about whether we decree to be Metamei retroactively from when she converted, when it is illogical to be Metamei me'Es la'Es.)

(Rebbi): R. Yosi's words are Nir'in (appear correct) regarding blood, and R. Yehudah's words are Nir'in] regarding a child. (We explained this like HA'GAON RAV C. KANIEVSKY, SHLITA.)

(R. Chaninah brei d'R. Avahu): A case came in front of my father, and he sent to R. Chiyah, R. Yosi and R. Ami, and they ruled like R. Yosi regarding a child.

Question: (Why did he need to say so?) Had he not said so, what would we say? When R. Yehudah and R. Yosi argue, does not the Halachah follow R. Yosi?!

Answer: [He needed to say so] because Rebbi said [that R. Yehudah's words about a child are] Nir'in. (One might have thought that he meant that R. Yehudah's words were Nir'in to R. Yosi, and R. Yosi retracted and agreed with him.)

Question: Didn't R. Ba say in the name of R. Ze'orah that wherever Rebbi said "Nir'in", the argument persists, except for a ring of pressed figs - there, this one agreed with this one, and this one agreed with this one! (We explained this like SHA'AREI TORAS ERETZ YISRAEL.)

Question (R. Yosi, to R. Chaninah brei d'R. Avahu): [The lenient opinion about a child, is he lenient] even if it is known that they had Bi'ah?

Answer (R. Chaninah brei d'R. Avahu): Are Stam Nochriyos not as if they [Vadai] had Bi'ah?! (Even so, one opinion says that she need not wait.)

Shimon bar Ba: A case occurred in front of R. Yochanan, and he ruled like R. Yosi, and R. Lazar was pained - he abandons the Stam [Mishnah], and does like an individual?!

[Later,] R. Lazar found that R. Chiyah taught [the first Tana's opinion] in the name of R. Meir. When he heard that R. Chiyah taught it in the name of R. Meir, he said "the elder (R. Yochanan) knows how to answer for himself!"

Question (R. Mana, to R. Yudan): Didn't R. Chizkiyah say in the name of R. Avahu in the name of R. Lazar "wherever Rebbi taught a Machlokes [in a Mishnah] and afterwards a Stam, the Halachah follows the Stam", and here you say so [that since a Beraisa says that it is R. Meir's opinion, the Halachah does not follow our Stam Mishnah]?!

Answer #1 (R. Yudan): Rebbi did not [teach Machlokes]. Someone else (R. Chiya) taught it!

Objection: If when we find that Rebbi taught in our Mishnah taught an argument, and later he taught Stam, the Halachah follows the Stam - in a place that we do not find that Rebbi taught an argument, rather, others taught an argument, and Rebbi taught Stam, all the more so the Halachah should follow the Stam!

Strengthening of objection: Came R. Chizkiyah, R. Yakov bar Acha, and R. Shimon bar Ba in the name of R. Lazar, and [said] that even if others taught an argument, and Rebbi taught Stam, the Halachah follows the Stam.

Question: (If so, R. Lazar's question returns!) Why did [R. Yochanan] rule like an individual?

Answer #2 (R. Shmuel bar Iniya in the name of R. Acha): We say [that the Halachah follows the Stam] when the argument was not taught by (in the same Mishnah as) the Stam. However, when the argument was taught by the Stam (it is called Stam because one opinion is anonymous) the Halachah does not [necessarily] follow the Stam.

Answer #3 (R. Yosi bei R. Bun citing R. Acha): We say [that the Halachah follows the Stam when the argument is] an individual against an individual, but if an individual argues with Chachamim (and the Stam is like the individual) the Halachah [need] not follow the Stam.

(R. Yochanan): Wherever Stam Mishnayos were taught, they are Rabanan (the majority opinion), unless his Rebbi explicitly teaches him [that it is an individual's opinion].

(Reish Lakish): All Stam Mishnayos are R. Meir, unless his Rebbi explicitly teaches him [otherwise].

(R. Ze'ira, in front of R. Yosi): Reish Lakish does not argue. Rather, he saw that the majority of Stam Mishnayos are like R. Meir [therefore, he inferred that this is a general rule].

Question (R. Ze'ira, to R. Mana): How does a Rebbi [teach otherwise? Must the Rebbi bring a Beraisa [teaching that the Mishnah is like an individual, or unlike R. Meir], or may the Rebbi teach so [from reasoning]?

Answer: Is it not clear from R. Lazar [above] that the Rebbi [must bring] a Beraisa?!

When [R. Lazar] heard that R. Chiyah taught [the first Tana's opinion] in the name of R. Meir, he said "the elder knows how to answer for himself!"

(Initially, why was R. Lazar pained?) He should have said (i.e. assumed) that [R. Yochanan] received from his Rebbi that our Mishnah [is an individual's opinion! Rather, the Rebbi must bring a Beraisa. We explained this like HA'GAON RAV C. KANIEVSKY, SHLITA.]

One who does Chalitzah counts [three months] from the time of death. One who is divorced counts from when the Get was given.

(R. Chaninah): It is from when the Get was given.

(R. Yochanan): It is from the writing [of the Get, for they may not be secluded from then].

Rav and Shmuel [argued about this]. Rav held like R. Chaninah, and Shmuel said like R. Yochanan.

Question (Shmuel, against Rav): According to you, who say that from when it was given, why are you concerned - because they were secluded in between [and perhaps she became pregnant then? If so,] we should be concerned for a Get Yashan!

Question (R. Chaninah, against R. Yochanan): According to you, who say that from when it was written, if there were two Gitin [for different women] - one was written now, and one was written later, and both of them were given on one day - will you forbid this one [who received the Get written later, to remarry], and permit this one [who received the Get written earlier? This looks ludicrous. People will mock Chachamim's words!]

[The Gemara did not record answers to these questions. Presumably,] what Rav asked [back] against Shmuel, is what R. Chaninah asked against R. Yochanan. What R. Yochanan asked back against R. Chaninah is what Shmuel asked against Rav.

The Halachah is, one counts for a Get from the time it was written, if he was not secluded with her [after that].

[R. Yosi says, all women may become Mekudashos,] except for a widow, due to Aveilus.

How much is Aveilus? It is 30 days.

Limitation: This refers to women, but a man must wait three festivals.

Limitation: This is if he has children. However, if he does not have children, [he is permitted] immediately.

Limitation: This is if he has someone to serve him. However, if he does not have someone to serve him, [he is permitted] immediately.

Limitation: This is if he does not have small children. However, if he has small children, [he is permitted] immediately.

Support: This is like the episode in which R. Tarfon's wife died. While he was in the cemetery, he told her sister "enter [my house] and raise your sister's children";

Even though he entered (had Nisu'in with) her, he was not intimate with her until after 30 days.