transfer this scroll only to one another, so that it would not come into the possession of anyone who might misuse its information. And now that the members of my father's house are not reliable, I am concerned that they might pass the scroll to the wrong person. I will not give it to one of them but only to someone whom I judge to be completely trustworthy. Therefore, here it is for you, as I can trust you to take the scroll and be careful with it, so that it will not reach anyone who might misuse its information. Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri continued: And when I came and recounted these matters to Rabbi Akiva, his eyes shed tears, and he said: From now on, we should not mention the members of the house of Avtinas unfavorably, as it is evident that the only reason they did not teach their skills to others was due to the fear that someone might misuse them for idolatrous purposes.

The mishna states that Elazar was responsible for the Temple curtains. The Gemara explains that this means he was the supervisor of the Temple curtain weavers. The mishna further teaches that Pineḥas was the valet. The Gemara states that he would dress the High Priest in the High Priestly vestments. The expertise of those appointed to this position was so great that there was an incident involving a certain valet priest who dressed a certain Roman army officer [isteratiyot], and the officer was so impressed with the manner in which he dressed him that he gave him eight gold coins. And some say he gave him twelve gold coins.

Halakha 2 · MISHNA There must be no fewer than seven trustees [amarkolin] and three treasurers appointed over the Temple administration. And we do not appoint an authority over the public comprised of fewer than two people, except for ben Aḥiyya, who was responsible for healing priests who suffered from intestinal disease, and Elazar, who was responsible for the weaving of the Temple curtains. The reason for these exceptions is that the majority of the public accepted these men upon themselves as officials who served without the assistance of even a single partner.

GEMARA: The mishna states that there must be no fewer three treasurers and seven trustees. The Gemara states that it was likewise taught in a baraita that there must be no fewer than two executive supervisors [katalikin]. This is as it is written in the verse that lists the men who supervised the receipt of teruma and tithes from the public and their distribution to the priests and the Levites, as well as the receipt of items dedicated to the Temple: "And Jehiel, and Azaziah, and Nahath," these were the treasurers; "and Asahel, and Jerimoth, and Jozabad, and Eliel, and Ismachiah, and Mahath, and Benaiah," these were the trustees; "overseers under the hand of Conaniah and Shimei his brother," these were executive supervisors; "by the appointment of Hezekiah the king and Azariah the ruler of the House of God," they were the king and the High Priest, the most senior officials (II Chronicles 31:13).

These officials participated in the supervision of the Temple assets, according to the level and status of their positions. When he would seal an item to store in the treasury until it would be needed, the treasurer would first seal it with his own seal; and subsequently give it to a trustee; the trustee would seal it and give it to an executive supervisor; the executive supervisor would seal it and give it to the High Priest; and the High Priest would seal it and give it to the king, who would place the final seal. And when a treasurer wanted to release an item for usage, the reverse order was followed: First the king would examine his seal and release the restriction on the item; the High Priest would examine his seal and release it; the executive supervisor would examine his seal and release it; the trustee would examine his seal and release it; and finally the treasurer would examine his seal and release it.

The mishna states that we do not appoint an authority over the public, in monetary matters, comprised of fewer than two appointees. Rav Naḥman said in the name of Rabbi Mana: This principle is derived on the basis of a verse that is referring to those engaged in building the Tabernacle and weaving the priestly vestments, who received the community's donations: "And they shall take the gold, and the sky blue wool, and the purple wool" (Exodus 28:5). The plural "they" indicates that this authority must consist of at least two people.

Rabbi Ḥama, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: Although Moses supervised the building of the Tabernacle, he took nothing for himself from the community donations, as Moses grew wealthy only from the shavings that broke off during the chiseling process of the second tablets. This is as it is written: "Hew for yourself two tablets of stone" (Exodus 34:1). "Hew [pesol] for yourself" indicates that the shavings [pesolet] shall be yours. Rabbi Ḥanin said: The Holy One, Blessed be He, created a quarry of precious stones and pearls for Moses inside his tent, and Moses grew wealthy from that source.

It is written: "And it came to pass when Moses went out to the Tent, that all the people rose up, and stood, every man at his tent door, and looked after Moses, until he had gone into the Tent" (Exodus 33:8). Two amora'im interpreted this verse with regard to Moses' wealth, but in opposite ways. One said: The people looked at Moses unfavorably; while the other said: The people looked at Moses favorably. He who said that the people looked at Moses unfavorably maintains that they said: Look at his legs, look at his feet, look at his flesh. See how healthy they are. All that he eats comes from us Jews, all that he drinks comes from us Jews, and all of his assets are taken from us Jews. And the one who said that they looked at Moses favorably maintains that the people were not responding to Moses' wealth but simply wanted to see the righteous man, saying: We desire to view the righteous, and one who merits to view Moses earns great rewards.

Halakha 3 · MISHNA This mishna provides details of the functions performed by Yoḥanan ben Pineḥas and Aḥiyya, the officials mentioned in the first mishna of this chapter, which concerns the seals and libations. There were four seals in the Temple that confirmed that the bearer had paid for the libations that accompanied his offering. And one of the following inscriptions was written on them: Calf; male, i.e., a ram; kid; and sinner, i.e., a leper, as leprosy is a punishment for one of seven sins (see Arakhin 16a). Conversely, ben Azzai says: There were five seals, and the following was written upon them in Aramaic, not Hebrew: Calf, male, kid, poor sinner, and rich sinner. The mishna explains the significance of each of the four aforementioned seals. The calf seal serves as a payment receipt for libations of cattle offerings, whether they are large or small, male or female, as all offerings from the cow family are accompanied by the same libation. The kid seal serves for libations of sheep or goat offerings, whether large or small, male or female, except for those of rams aged thirteen months and older. The ram seal, which was earlier called the male seal, serves exclusively for ram libations. The sinner seal serves for libations of the three animal offerings of a leper, for the completion of his purification. One who seeks libations for his offering goes to Yoḥanan, the official who was responsible for the seals, and gives him the appropriate sum of money and receives a seal from him. With that seal he subsequently comes to Aḥiyya, who was responsible for the libations, and gives him Yoḥanan's seal and receives his libations from him. In the evening, Yoḥanan and Aḥiyya would get together to reconcile their accounts, and Aḥiyya would take out the seals he had received and accept the money Yoḥanan had received in exchange for them. If the money was less than the value of the seals, they were less to him, i.e., Yoḥanan would bear the loss, and Yoḥanan would have to pay the difference to the Temple treasury from his own property. And if there was some money left over, i.e., the total money was greater than the value of the seals, they were left over to the benefit of the Temple treasury of consecrated property, as the Temple treasury always has the upper hand. With regard to one who lost his seal that he purchased from Yoḥanan, Yoḥanan and Aḥiyya would wait to resolve his problem until the evening. And when they added their accounts in the evening, if they found for him a surplus of money equivalent to the value of his seal, they would give him the corresponding libations. And if not, they would not give him libations. And the name of the day of the week was written upon the seals because of the cheats. They might try to use old seals that had been lost by the Temple officials or by someone who had brought an offering at an earlier date, so as to receive libations in a deceitful manner.

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: And according to the opinion of ben Azzai, why was it necessary to have a seal labeled poor sinner? The Gemara answers: Ben Azzai maintains that a poor leper would have to bring his log of oil with him. This is referring to the additional oil required for the leper's purification (Leviticus 14:15-18), some of which is sprinkled on the altar while the rest is applied to the leper's ear, thumb, big toe, and head. According to ben Azzai, a leper would purchase this additional oil from Aḥiyya, and therefore he required a separate seal for each log of oil. However, according to the opinion of the Rabbis, a poor leper brings only the kid seal purchased from Yoḥanan, by which he receives the oil for his meal offering, and he must use his own private oil for the additional log. The mishna mentions only the libations for kids, referring to both sheep and goats that are less than one year old, and for rams, which are adult male sheep. The Gemara asks: What amounts are brought for the libations of a lamb, i.e., a female sheep in its second year? Are they the same as those of a kid or a ram? The Gemara answers that this halakha may be inferred from that which we learned in the mishna, that the kid seal serves for libations of sheep offerings, whether large or small, male or female. That ruling says, i.e., indicates, that the libations of a lamb are like the libations of a kid. The Gemara adds that this is derived from a verse that equates the two libations, as it is written: "Thus shall it be done for each bull, or for each ram, or for each of the lambs, or of the kids" (Numbers 15:11). The Gemara inquires further: Why is it stated: For each bull? The verse teaches that The Torah does not differentiate between the libations of a calf, which is less than a year old, and the libations of a bull, which is at least one year old. The Gemara explains: This is because it was fitting to differentiate between them, in light of the fact that both the offspring of a sheep requires libations and the offspring of a cow requires libations. If we find that the Torah differentiates between the libations of a sheep in its first year, whose meal offering is one isaron of fine flour, and the libations of a ram, a male sheep thirteen months old and older, whose meal-offering is two isaron,