Commentary for Avodah Zarah 85:16

If the middle clause deals with making them, then the last clause should as well. But this is again a problem. The last clause would prohibit making the image of a dragon, but according to another baraita, making an image of god is prohibited, not the image of a dragon.
Therefore, this section must refer to finding. One can keep utensils unless they have on them with image of the sun, moon or dragon.
Now, in conclusion the first and third clauses of the baraita refer to finding vessels with these images on them, whereas the third clause prohibits making vessels with these images on them. This seems to be a strange structure for a baraita, and therefore this is one long extended difficulty.

Abaye is indeed willing to interpret the baraita such that each clause deals with a different aspect.

Rava says that the whole baraita refers to finding an object with one of these drawings on it. The baraita accords with R. Judah who does prohibit an object with the face of a human.
The baraita mentions two common mythological images. The nursing woman may be the Egyptian goddess Isis, although there were other goddesses pictured as nursing. Serapis is a Greco-Egyptian god. He is always pictured with a measuring bowl on his head. Note that the baraita gives Hebrew puns on the names or presentations of these Greek gods.

For the image of the dragon to be prohibited, it must have joints between its neck.

Great story!

From this story, three significant halakhic lessons can be learned.

R. Hanina quotes a baraita from Bava Metzia. According to this baraita, when people lose something in a place from which they assume that the object will not be recoverable, they despair of recovering it. The object then may be kept by the finder. R. Hanina posits that just as the person who lost the object assumes he will not recover it, he also annuls it as being an idol. So why then does R. Elazar demand that some random idolater annul it?

Abaye says that while the owner despairs of recovering it, he is not really annulling it. He assumes that no matter who finds his idolatrous object, it will again be worshipped. Therefore, R. Elazar made sure that he found an idolater who would annul it.

Rabban Gamaliel used to have pictures of the moon that he would show people to determine if they had seen the new moon and that he could rule that the day was Rosh Hodesh (this source is from Mishnah Berachot). But how could he do this—is it not prohibited to make pictures of the moon!

Abaye explains that the Torah prohibits only the making of God’s attendants, things that serve God, if they can actually be reproduced in a way that is close to how they actually are. Since one cannot make a moon that is anything like the moon, drawing the moon is permitted.

This baraita is cited as proof for Abaye’s statement. One should not make things that are exactly like the structures in the Temple, or the objects therein. But one can make objects that are close to those in the Temple, but not exactly the same, such as 5, 6 or 8 branched candelabra.
The baraita cites a menorah made by the Hasmoneans when they purified the Temple. This is an interesting historical memory, which is found also in other rabbinic sources. According to R. Yose, the Hasmoneans needed to make it out of wood, because they were in haste after the Greeks either stole or defiled the gold menorah. The other rabbis believe that this menorah was made of staves, which other sources identify as the spears they used in war. They covered the menorah with tin, probably to stabilize or protect it and then eventually made it into gold.

This baraita seems to prohibit making the heavenly bodies. So again, we must ask, how did Rabban Gamaliel make images of the moon?

Abaye explains that the only of God’s attendants that one may not make is the four-faced creatures (human, lion, eagle, ox) of the Divine chariot (see Ezekiel, chapter one). Any other image can be made, including the moon.

Introduction
Yesterday’s section concluded by justifying Rabban Gamaliel’s moon images by saying that he did not make them, someone made them for him, so it is okay. Today’s section questions whether it is allowed to use images that someone else made.