(R. Yirmiyah citing R. Chiya citing R. Shimon ben Lakish): (The Mishnah taught (Erchin 12(e)) that Yochanan Kohen Gadol stopped the recitation of Vidui over Maaser.) (Ezra penalized the Leviim of his time (who refused to return with him to Yerushalayim) by awarding Maaser Rishon to the Kohanim. When Yochanan Kohen Gadol saw that even in his generation,) people were still suspected of giving their Maaser to Kohanim, (he annulled Vidui Maaser, since people could not say (Devarim 26:13) 'and I have also given to the Levi'.)

That teaching of Reish Lakish in one way supports R. Yochanan (who praised Yochanan Kohen Gadol, unlike R. Yehoshua ben Levi who criticized him, as the Gemara will later say) and in another way disagrees with him...

It disagrees with R. Yochanan, as the Mishnah (in Maseches Yevamos) teaches - 'Similarly, if the daughter of a Kohen is betrothed to a Levi, she may eat neither Terumah nor Maaser'.

Question: Terumah is understandable, but why not Maaser? Either way, if she is a Kohenes, she can eat and if she's a Leviyah, she can eat?!

Answer (R. Ila citing R. Yochanan): That Mishnah follows the opinion that one may not give Maaser to a Kohen.

This shows that R. Yochanan himself says that one may give Maaser to a Kohen.

And the statement of Reish Lakish (earlier in (a)) supports R. Yochanan - as R. Yochanan said - Yochanan Kohen Gadol investigated in all of the cities of Yisrael and discovered that they were only separating Terumah Gedolah, but as for Maaser Rishon and Sheni, some would separate and some would not.

He said, "Since if one does not separate Maaser Rishon or Maaser Sheni, it is Tevel and may not be eaten; a person who buys produce from an Am HaAretz must declare Terumah and Terumas Maaser and give them to a Kohen; (he declares Maaser Rishon but doesn't need to give it the Levi); and then he declares Maaser Sheni and redeems it onto coins. Finally, he must declare Maaser Ani which he may keep, since in order to receive it, a poor man would need to prove (that it is obligated in Maaser Ani and he cannot do so since it might have already been given). (And since people were not tithing correctly, they could not recite the Vidui.)

Question: Why not recite the Vidui?

Answer (R. Hila): It causes anger before Hash-m if a person says that he acted as required when he did not.

Question: If so, one who separated should have recited and one who did not separate should not have recited? (Why did Yochanan cancel it completely?)

Answer: It's like the Baraisa - Originally, they would recite the Vidui in a low voice until the pasuk of 'Hashkifa' and from that pasuk, they would recite it out loud. (This was in order not to embarrass those who had not separated correctly. Similarly, in order to avoid embarrassment, Yochanan Kohen Gadol cancelled the recitation completely.)

The Mishnah taught that Yochanan Kohen Gadol also stopped the Meorrarin. This refers to those that say, (Tehillim 44:24), "Awaken! Why should you sleep Hash-m? Arouse Yourself, do not forsake forever."

Question: Does Hash-m sleep?! Another pasuk says (Tehillim 121:4), "Behold, He doesn't slumber, He doesn't sleep, Guardian of Yisrael"! If so, what is the meaning of (Tehillim 78: 65), "And Hash-m awoke like one who is asleep"? Rather, it is as if He is sleeping when Yisrael are suffering and the nations of the world are comfortable. As the pasuk states (Iyov 17:2), "And with their provocations I close my eyes."

(The Mishnah taught that Yochanan Kohen Gadol) also (stopped) the Nokfin. This refers to those who would hit the calf between its horns.

(Yochanan Kohen Gadol to the Nokfin): How long will you continue to feed Tereifos to the altar? He made rings for all of them.

(R. Ba citing R. Yehuda): The rings were wide at the bottom and narrow at the top.

(The Mishnah taught that until his days, the hammer would be banging in Yerushalayim (during Chol HaMoed)). This means until the beginning of his days.

(And the Mishnah taught that in his days, nobody needed to ask about Demai.) This is because he set up pairs (of Talmidei Chachamim to supervise and ensure that the Am HaAretz market sellers would not sell untithed produce).

The words of R. Yehoshua ben Levi (that follow) teach that some of the decrees of Yochanan Kohen Gadol were to praised and some were to be criticized...

(R. Yosi citing R. Tanchum bar Chiya, and R. Chizkiyah citing R. Elazar b'Rebbi Yosi citing R. Tanchum bar Chiya citing R. Yehoshua ben Levi): Originally (in the time of Ezra), the people's Maaser Rishon was divided into three parts - a third went to Kohanim and Leviim who were the regular recipients; a third went to the treasury (as will be explained) and a third went to the poor and the Talmidei Chachamim of Yerushalayim.

(R. Yosi bei R. Bun): Whoever went to Yerushalayim (to make a claim in Beis Din there) - the first three times a defendant was ordered to come to a hearing in Beis Din, the claimant was required to pay the expenses. After that, (if the defendant still refused to come, Beis Din would go through the process of collecting the debt from him without his consent and the expenses were borrowed) from the treasury (and paid back from the defendant's money).

From when Elazar ben Pechorah and Yehuda ben Pechorah (who were tough Kohanim) came, they took all of the Maaser from the treasury. Yochanan Kohen Gadol was able to protest them but he refrained. Therefore, for cancelling the Vidui declaration as a result, he was criticized.

However, his decrees against the Meorrarin and the Nokfin (see above (h) to (k)) were praised.

(The Mishnah taught that) until his days, the hammer would be banging in Yerushalayim (during Chol HaMoed)), which meant until the beginning of his days.

Question (R. Chasida to R. Chizkiyah): Isn't it logical to say that he was also criticized for this, since it says 'until his days', rather than 'in his days', indicating that the hammering only stopped at the end of his days...?

Answer (R. Chizkiyah to R. Chasida): I agree.

(What is the meaning of) 'Demai'? R. Yosi citing R. Abahu and R. Chizkiyah citing R. Yehuda ben Pazi said - It is short for 'Da Mai' - 'What is this'? Has it been tithed or not?