Hillel says: A Full hin of drawn water disqualifies a mikveh that is incomplete. [Hillel chose the above wording] only because a person is required to speak in the language of his teacher. But Shammai says: Nine kavs. And the Sages say neither in accord-ance with the words of this one nor in accordance with the words of that one; rather, [the matter was in dispute] until two weavers came from the Dung Gate of Jerusalem, and they testified in the name of Shemayah and Avtalyon that three lugin of drawn water disqualify a mikveh. And the Sages upheld their words.

And why do we mention the words of Shammai and Hillel for naught? In order to teach future generations that a person should not stand by his opinion, for even the patriarchs of the world did not stand by their words.

And why do we mention the opinions of an individual among the majority since [in any case] the halachah does not accord [with him] but rather with the opinion of the majority? So that if a court will form the opinion of the individual and rely upon him, then a subsequent court will not be able to nullify the verdict of its fellow court unless it is greater than [the first court] in wisdom and in number. If [the latter] was greater than [the former] in wisdom but not in number, or in number but not in wisdom, it is not able to nullify the decision of the [former court] unless [the latter] is greater in number and in wisdom.