Avodah Zarah

And as to R. Huna?  — [His statement is necessary] because the Mishnah has not [retained its original] order,  so that it might be said that the anonymous statement was quoted earlier and the differing opinions later. But if that were so, you can apply to every case of differing opinions followed by an anonymous one the argument that the Mishnah has not retained its original order!  R. Huna, however, [could reply thus]: The argument that the Mishnah has not its original order could not be admitted in regard to the same Tractate, but it could be used in regard to two Tractates.  And as to R. Joseph?  — He holds that all [those dealing with] torts  are to be regarded as one tractate; or, if you wish, it could be said, because this rule is included among legal and fixed decisions, thus: 'The party which changes an agreement has the lesser right; and whichever party alters his mind has the lesser right. Our Rabbis taught:  One should not say to another [on the Sabbath], 'We shall see whether you will stay on with me [to do work] this evening.'  R. Joshua b. Karha says: One may say to another, 'We shall see whether you will stay on with me this evening.' Said Rabbah b. Bar-Hana in the name of R. Johanan, the halachah is according to R. Joshua b. Karha. Our Rabbis taught: If one consulted a sage who declared [the person or article] as unclean, he should not consult another sage who might declare it as clean; if one sage declared as forbidden, one should not consult another sage who might declare as permitted. If of two sages present one declares as unclean and the other as clean, one forbids and the other permits, then if one of them is superior to the other in learning and in point of number  his opinion should be followed, otherwise, the one holding the stricter view should be followed. R. Joshua b. Karha says: In laws of the Torah  follow the stricter view, in those of Soferim  follow the more lenient view.  Said R. Joseph: The halachah is according to R. Joshua b. Karha. Our Rabbis taught: If they  reverted [to their usual practices] none of them should ever be accepted.  This is the opinion of R. Meir. R. Judah says: If they reverted in secret matters, they should not be accepted,  but if in things done in public they should be accepted.  Some say that, if they observed [in their penitent state] even secret things, they should be accepted,