He said to her, "We elevate in sanctity and do not downgrade." [She said,] "Maybe he will punish you": Rashi does not teach any of this [version]. And it appears that his reason is that this reason - we increase with holiness, etc. - is not correct. As behold, they took down Rabban Gamliel! Also the challenge, "Maybe he will punish you," is not correct, since they already said, "He is a tenth [generation descendant] of Ezra, so he has the merit of ancestors, etc." However it appears [nevertheless possible] to maintain [the version of] all the old books: As [regarding] what she said, "Maybe they will remove you" - she was not concerned whether they would do what was improper, God forbid, like they did to Rabban Gamliel according to her opinion. Rather, [her concern was that] "Rabban Gamliel appease them and they go back and appoint him and remove you, so that you will be embarrassed" - as it concludes later, "Remove him? We have learned, we elevate in sanctity, etc." Also that which she said, "Maybe he will punish you," is that she did not rely upon that which he had the merit of ancestors. It is as we say in general, "maybe [the falling away of merit] will be caused by sin." And it is easy to understand.

Any Torah scholar whose inside is not like his outside [will] not, etc.: And that is why they compared it in the dream to jugs filled with ashes. As from the outside, the jug is whitened and complete, but on the inside, there is only ash in it - which is something lowly and not worthwhile. And in the chapter [entitled] Ba Lo (Yoma 72b), it explains that a student whose inside is not like his outside means that he occupies himself with Torah but he does not have the fear of Heaven with him. And there is no distinction to be made between the student [mentioned there] and the Torah scholar of here. And it is easy to understand.

Sennacherib already arose, etc.: It is explained in the first chapter of Sotah (9a) in the Tosafot and in our novellae there.

From the walls of your house it is apparent that you are a pechami: See Rashi's commentary. And in the Sefer Yuchasin, [its author] wrote other explanations, see there.

The one who wears the uniform (mada) shall wear the uniform, etc. It is clear that the mada is a fancy garment that kings wear, as it is written (I Samuel 17:38), "And Shaul clothed David in his mada. And it is a cloak like Rashi explains; and as it is written (II Samuel 13:18), "for maiden princesses wore robes." And this is since Rabban Gamliel was from the descendants of the leaders and kings, from the Children of Yehudah. Whereas Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah was not so, as he was a priest. And it is only fitting for a king and a Nassi to be from the descendants of Yehudah. And this is as it is said in the first chapter of Sanhedrin (5a), "'The scepter shall not depart from Yehudah' (Genesis 49:10) - these are the Exilarchs in Babylonia; 'Nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet' - these are the grandchildren of Hillel, etc." And Rabbi Yehoshua is [talking] about this, saying that the office of Nassi is returning to Rabban Gamliel by right, since he is from the descendants of the leaders; and it is not appropriate for Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah - who was a priest - to take the office of Nassi from him. And it is like they said, that the kings of the House of the Hasmoneans - who were priests - were punished for having taken for themselves, the monarchy that belongs to the descendants of David. And Rabbi Yehoshua spoke about the high priest to appease the mind of Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah with the opposite - that "one who sprinkles, son of one who sprinkles, etc." For the priesthood is given to the descendants of Aharon the priest, meaning to Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah. And [for] "one who is not one who sprinkles, etc." - meaning he is not from the descendants of the priesthood - the priesthood is forbidden to him; even to a king, as we found with Uziyahu, who contracted tzaraat for this. And just like no man can touch what is prepared for you, which is the priesthood - so too, you should not touch that which is prepared for your fellow, Rabban Gamliel, which is the office of the Nassi. And he brought that they would not say to a priest, "Your water is cave water and your ashes are, etc": That perforce we trust a priest about something that is related to the priesthood, meaning that it is purification water [that he is using], and not cave water which is disqualified from sprinkling; and we also trust a priest that he sprinkled the dust of a heifer and not burnt ashes - so too we should not be exacting with Rabban Gamliel concerning that which is related to his office of the Nassi. And it is easy to understand.

Have you been appeased? Everything we did, etc.: Meaning to say, since you have been appeased, we will also agree to the thing, to bring him back to his office of Nassi. For we only did [it], to remove him, for your honor. So behold, early tomorrow, you and I will go to his doorway, in the way that [people] arise early in the morning to [go to] the doorways of kings and important people - to show that it is our opinion to bring him back to his greatness. And if we go out, who will not go out? And it is easy to understand.

Rather, Rabban Gamliel will lecture, etc.: I did not understand this. This is since it was fit for each one of them to lecture one Shabbat; except they did not do this on account of jealousy, as 'two kings cannot use the same crown equally.' However it would be sufficient for Rabban Gamliel to have two weeks and for Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah to have one week - as then it would not lead to jealousy. And be precise and you will find it simple.