Arachin, Chapter 6, Mishnah 4. This chapter has been tracing what the treasury of the Beit Hamikdash may seize from a person who has fallen behind on his pledge, and what must be left in his hands. The previous mishnah established the principle for a tradesman: when collateral is taken from him to press him toward paying his erech vow on time, he is left with two of every kind of implement his livelihood requires. Our mishnah asks the obvious follow-up question: what happens when his tool chest is uneven, when he owns a surplus of one kind of tool and only a single specimen of another?
The case of the uneven tool chest
The mishnah opens its case: "hayah min echad merubeh", he possessed one type of implement in quantity, "umin echad mu'at", while of another type he had only a small number. Our tradesman, the one who pledged an erech or dedicated property, has a pile of one tool sitting in his shop, yet of a second tool that his craft equally demands he owns just a single specimen.
"Ein omrim lo", the court does not say to him, "limkor min hamerubeh", that he should sell off part of what he has in quantity, "velikach lo", and with that money purchase for himself, "min hamu'at", additional units of the tool he is short on. No one turns to him and says: you are sitting on a stack of these, unload a couple and use the cash to fill out the set you lack.
Rather, says the mishnah, "nosnin lo shenayim", he is left with two, "min hamerubeh", from the type he owns in quantity, "vechol sheyesh lo", together with everything he already possesses, "min hamu'at", of the type he is short on.
Picture a carpenter who owns three planes, the tool used for smoothing wood, and a single saw. He is told: of the three planes, you may retain two, and as for the saw, you own only one, so keep it. He is not permitted to liquidate the third plane and use that money to buy himself a second saw which he would then be allowed to keep. Until now he has run his workshop with one saw; he can go on running it the same way.
Why tools differ from basic necessities
An earlier teaching in the masechet dealt with someone stripped of life's basics: something to eat, a garment, a bed, footwear, tefillin. In that situation money is set aside so that he can go out and obtain them. The instruments of a craft belong to a different category. Halachah does not rank them among the essentials for which purchase funds are reserved. What he already owns stays with him, up to two of each type, but no part of his estate is sold off to bring his kit up to the permitted quota.
One who consecrates all his possessions
The mishnah now sets up a contrast. In the context of collecting a pledge we saw that a man's tefillin remain untouchable: the collector may not lay a hand on them. That immunity, however, belongs specifically to the taking of security. Now consider a different scenario, "hamakdish et nechasav", someone who announces that everything he owns is consecrated. Such a declaration takes in the whole estate: his implements, his clothing, and the tefillin along with them. It has all passed into the ownership of hekdesh.
Should he want them back, the mishnah rules "ma'alin lo", an evaluation is carried out on his behalf, "et tefilav", of the tefillin, and he pays that assessed amount over to the gizbar, the official in charge of the Temple funds. Only then are they released to him. An article that no collector could ever have seized is thus swept up by a blanket act of consecration.
And here is the practical difficulty. If everything he owned was consecrated, his money went along with it. So in order to redeem his tefillin, he will have to borrow the assessed sum from someone else and pay it over to the hekdesh, and only then will his tefillin return to his hands.