of the great study hall. When Rabbi Mana came to visit him, Rabbi Avun, proud of his donation for this building, said to him: Look at what I did and the greatness of my contribution. Rabbi Mana said to him: Your attitude reminds me of the verse: "For Israel has forgotten his Maker, and built palaces" (Hosea 8:14). How could you focus upon the gates? Weren't there people who would have exerted themselves in the study of Torah if they only had the money? You could have given them that money instead of using it to build structures.

§ With regard to the vessels donated for the Temple maintenance, which are mentioned in the mishna, the Gemara cites a baraita in which it was taught: If the shekels collected for the purchase of articles consecrated for the altar, i.e., communal offerings, are not enough to purchase them and the items that accompanied them, e.g., their libations, the funds required for purchasing the remainder are taken from the funds consecrated for Temple maintenance. However, the converse is not the case: If there is a need for funds consecrated to Temple maintenance, that which is required for it is not taken from funds consecrated for the altar. The reason for this difference is that an item may be changed from a lesser to a greater sanctity, but not vice versa. The Gemara notes an apparent contradiction. But didn't we learn in the mishna: A vessel that they found for it a use for Temple maintenance, they leave it for that purpose; and the rest are sold, and their monetary value is allocated to Temple maintenance. This statement indicates that this money could be used only for Temple maintenance, not for items consecrated for the altar. This contradicts the baraita cited above. In resolution of this contradiction, Rabbi Ḥizkiya said: This is the intent of the mishna: Donated items and, likewise, any money received as payment for sale of an item are physically taken to the chamber for the Temple maintenance. From there they may be removed for any Temple purpose, either for the maintenance of the Temple or for articles consecrated for the altar.

Halakha 1 · MISHNA There were thirteen collection horns, narrow at the top and wide at the bottom, into which were placed the shekels that were collected for the various needs of the Temple. There were also thirteen tables for various purposes, and thirteen prostrations in the Temple. The members of the household of Rabban Gamliel and the members of the household of Rabbi Ḥananya, the deputy High Priest, would prostrate themselves in fourteen places. And where was this extra location? It was facing the wood depository, as there was a tradition handed down to them from their fathers that the Ark was sequestered there. The mishna relates that there was an incident involving a certain priest who was going about his duties and saw a certain flagstone that was different from the others. He noticed that one of the stones was slightly raised above the others, indicating that it had been removed and returned to its place. The priest understood that this was the opening to an underground tunnel where the Ark was concealed. He came and said to his fellow that he had noticed this deviation in the floor. He did not manage to conclude relating the incident before his soul left him, i.e., he died. Following this event, they knew with certainty that the Ark was sequestered there and that God had prevented that priest from revealing its location.

GEMARA: It was taught in a baraita: Those collection horns were asymmetrical. They were narrow at the top and wide at the bottom. Why were they shaped like that? It was due to cheaters, to prevent them from inserting their hands on the pretense of adding shekels and removing them instead.

The Gemara cites a baraita that expounds a tannaitic dispute with regard to the sequestering of the Ark, a topic mentioned in the mishna: It was taught in the name of Rabbi Elazar: The Ark was exiled with the Jews to Babylonia. When the Jews were exiled to Babylonia, they took the Ark with them. What is the source for this statement? When Isaiah prophesied about the exile before King Hezekiah, he stated: "Behold, the days come, that all that is in your house, and that which your fathers have stored up until this day, shall be carried to Babylon; no item shall be left, said the Lord" (II Kings 20:17). The item [davar] referred to in the verse can only be an item that contains the commandments [dibrot]. That is the Ark, which contains the two tablets upon which the Ten Commandments are carved. And, so too, it says: "And at the return of the year, King Nebuchadnezzar sent, and brought him to Babylon, with the desired vessels of the House of the Lord, and made Zedekiah his brother king over Judah and Jerusalem" (II Chronicles 36:10). What is referred to by the phrase "the desired vessels of the House of the Lord"? This is the Ark, in which the Tablets of the Law were placed. The Torah is a desirable object for the Jews, as it is stated, "More to be desired are they than gold, indeed, than much fine gold" (Psalms 19:11). Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish differs and says: The Ark was not sent into exile, but rather was sequestered in its place, i.e., buried in the Holy of Holies. This is as it is written: "And the staves were so long that the ends of the staves were seen from the holy place, even before the Sanctuary; but they could not be seen without; and there they are until this day" (I Kings 8:8). The phrase "until this day" means forever, as "this day" can refer to any point in time. Consequently, this verse indicates that the Ark was sequestered in its place. Having cited this verse, the Gemara proceeds to further explain it, by pointing out an internal contradiction in the verse. Initially, it is written: "The ends of the staves were seen," and you say, in the continuation of the verse, "but they could not be seen." How can that be? Rather, the verse should be understood as follows: The staves could be seen and they could not be seen, as they protruded outward through the curtain like the two breasts of a woman. The staves themselves could not be seen, but their position was discernible from the protrusion of the curtain.

The Gemara returns to the discussion of the location of the Ark during the Second Temple period. And the Rabbis say: The Ark was sequestered in the wood depository chamber. The Gemara relates that there was an incident involving a certain blemished priest who was standing and splitting wood in the wood depository chamber in order to verify that the wood was not infested with worms. And he saw the flagstone that was different from the others. He came and said to his fellow: Come and see that this flagstone differs from the others. He did not manage to conclude relating the incident before his soul left him. And they knew with certainty that the Ark was sequestered there. Rabbi Hoshaya taught a slightly different version of the story in a baraita: He tapped on the stone with a mallet [kurenas] to determine if it was hollow underneath the stone, and fire came out and burned him.

The Gemara elaborates on the topic of the Ark of the Covenant. It was taught that Rabbi Yehuda ben Lakish said: Two Arks would travel with Israel in the desert: One, in which the Torah, i.e., the second tablets that were given to Moses after he broke the first ones, was placed, and the other, in which the shards of the first tablets were placed. That in which the Torah was kept, was the Ark that was placed in the Tent of Meeting, in the Holy of Holies. This is as it is written: "And the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord, and Moses, departed not out of the camp" (Numbers 14:44). The one in which the shards of the tablets were placed would embark and return with them when they went to war. Consequently, there were times that it would be seen among them. And the Rabbis say: There was only one Ark, not two, kept in the Holy of Holies. And one time it went out with the nation to battle in the days of Eli and it was captured. The Gemara notes that a verse supports the opinion of the Rabbis: When the Philistines who captured the Ark saw it, they said: "Woe unto us! Who shall deliver us out of the hand of these mighty gods?" (I Samuel 4:8). It is clear that they were very frightened, and it would seem that this was due to the fact that the Ark was something that they had never seen in all their days. There is also a verse that supports the opinion of Rabbi Yuda ben Lakish that there were two Arks, one that they took with them into battle and one that remained in its place. Apropos the battle of King Saul with the Philistines, the verse states: "And Saul said unto Ahijah: Bring here the Ark of God, for the Ark of God was there at that time with the children of Israel" (I Samuel 14:18). This is puzzling. Wasn't the Ark in Kiryat Ye'arim at the time (see I Samuel 7:1-2)? Therefore, it is clear that there were two Arks, one that resided in Kiryat Ye'arim and a different one that they took with them to battle. What do the Rabbis do with this verse so that it does not contradict their opinion? The Rabbis would interpret the verse as follows: Saul said, "Bring here" the container that contains the eight priestly garments, among them the frontplate. The verse is referring to this container, not the Ark. A different verse supports the opinion of Rabbi Yuda ben Lakish that there were two Arks: When Uriah explains to King David why he will not return to his house while there is a war with the children of Ammon, he says: "The Ark, and Israel, and Judah, abide in booths; and my lord Joab, and the servants of my lord, are encamped in the open field; shall I then go into my house, to eat and to drink, and to lie with my wife?" (II Samuel 11:11).