Inference: The Halachah [always] follows R. Yehoshua ben Levi against R. Yochanan.

Proof: We bring a proof that the Halachah follows Rav Papi because R. Yehoshua ben Levi holds like him, even though R. Yochanan argues with him.

Question #1: Since the seven Tuvei ha'Ir (governors of the city) stipulated in the presence of the people of the city, why [does the Beraisa permit] only if money was left over?

Note: The Gemara does not cite the entire Beraisa. The part cited does not explicitly mention "excess", but it is clear from the Gemara that it discusses the excess.

Question #2: Why did [the Beraisa] discuss this (the excess)? Even with all the money, they can do what they want, like he (Rava, who gave this answer) said above (26a-b), even to drink beer!

Rashi explained that they can buy beer with the money, to drink it.

Answer: It discusses money that was left over to teach that even the excess requires a Tenai;

One might have thought that if they bought a matter of Kedushah from the money, and there was left over, they may do with the leftover whatever they want, even without a Tenai;

[The Beraisa] teaches that this is not so.

Question: Why is this different than Se'ah b'Se'ah (lending a measure of grain on condition to be paid back the same measure)? In Bava Metzi'a (63a), we forbid this due to Tzad Echad b'Ribis, lest the price of grain rise!

Answer: Here is different, for it is not the way of a loan. Rather, he received it through a sale.

Question: Why is this different than one who gave a house or field for collateral?

Citation (Bava Metzi'a 65b): Even if he said "when you want to sell it, sell it only to me, for this amount" and he ate the Peros, it is forbidden;

Citation (cont. - Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua): This is unlike R. Yehudah, for R. Yehudah permits Tzad Echad b'Ribis.

Here there is only Tzad Echad b'Ribis, for perhaps he will not sell it. It is also a loan, for he said "Mashken" (give for collateral), and even so R. Yehudah permits!

Answer: Still, it is totally unlike a loan of Se'ah b'Se'ah, for there, there is no side of a sale at all. Here, and regarding collateral, there is one side in which it is a sale.

Explanation: R. Meir in our Mishnah holds that they used to stipulate to return [the amount proper to pay for] rental of the Beis ha'Keneses when they will return it [to the seller]. In such a case it is permitted, like R. Yehudah.

Explanation: This is even when it is totally permitted, e.g. he waited the time to walk four Amos. (He was stringent, and did not urinate until he distanced four Amos.)

Explanation: Even a nickname that is not derogatory [he did not make up];

We say (Bava Metzi'a 58b) that one who coins a nickname for his colleague has no share in the world to come. This refers to a Kinuy that blemishes the family.

Reference: This is like we say (Shabbos 23b), that one who is careful about Kidush ha'Yom merits, and they fill for him (he will be rewarded with) barrels of wine.

Question: Just the contrary! In the merit that he taught one Talmid 400 times, a Bas Kol (voice from Heaven) announced "do you prefer that your entire generation merit the world to come, or that you should live 400 years?";

Citation (Eruvin 54b): (He requested the former.) Hash-m said "give to him both of them!"

Answer: Initially, he did not know [that Hash-m would give both rewards], until the end, when he lived so long.

Note: Alternatively, they asked this before the episode with the Talmid (Tosfos ha'Rosh), or he lived so long due to both merits together (Tosfos Eruvin 54b).