(Mishnah): And she does not have Peros.

(R. Avina): She cannot takes from him (makes him pay for) Peros that he ate.

Limitation: This refers to what [the latter] ate before the first [husband] came, but if he ate after the first came, the latter] ate before the first [husband] came, she takes from him.

(Mishnah): If she took from this one or from this one, she returns.

Limitation: This refers to what she took after the first came, but if she took before the first came, just like she cannot take from him, he cannot take from her.

(Mishnah): If she has a child from either man, he is a Mamzer.

Question: Granted, the child from the second man is a Mamzer (she is still married to the first). Why is the child from the first a Mamzer?

Answer #1 (R. Ba citing R. Ze'ira): This is like R. Akiva, who says that one who had Bi'ah with his Sotah, the child is a Mamzer (for a Lav forbids her), and one who is Machzir Gerushaso after she married, the child is a Mamzer. (SEFER NIR - we needed to say that the child from Machzir Gerushaso is a Mamzer according to Shmuel, who says that even though she is considered Anusah, we are stringent lest people say that her first husband divorced her; Sotah does not apply to Ones.)

Answer #2 (R. Yosi citing R. Heila): All agree that the child is Kosher (mid'Oraisa). Just like her Get (that she must get from the second) is mid'Rabanan, so is her Mamzer [from the second, a Mamzer mid'Rabanan. He may not marry a Mamzeres.]

Question: What do [these answers] argue about?

Answer: If the second gave a Get to her, and afterwards the first had Bi'ah with her - according to R. Ba citing R. Ze'ira, the child is a Mamzer according to R. Akiva. According to R. Yosi citing R. Heila all agree that the child is Kosher (mid'Oraisa).