ממשכן. כתיב הכא: ״זאת התורה אדם כי ימות באהל״, וכתיב התם: ״ויפרוש את האהל על המשכן״. מה להלן של פשתן קרוי ״אהל״ — אף כאן של פשתן קרוי ״אהל״. אי מה להלן שזורין וחוטן כפול ששה, אף כאן שזורין וחוטן כפול ששה? תלמוד לומר: ״אהל״ ״אהל״ ריבה. אי ״אהל״ ״אהל״ ריבה, אפילו כל מילי נמי! אם כן גזירה שוה מאי אהני ליה?!
written in the context of the Tabernacle. It is written here, in the discussion of the laws of ritual impurity: “This is the law: When a man dies in a tent, every one that comes into the tent, and everything that is in the tent, should be impure 7 days” (Numbers 19:14), and it is written there: “And he spread the tent over the Tabernacle, and put the covering of the tent above upon it; as YHWH commanded Moses” (Exodus 40:19). Just as below, with regard to the Tabernacle, the tent was made of linen and is considered a tent, so too, here, with regard to the halakhot of ritual impurity imparted by a corpse, only a tent made of linen is considered a tent. The Talmud asks: If so, derive the following from that same verbal analogy: Just as below the linen threads in the Tabernacle were specifically threads that were twisted and the threads were folded 6 times, so too, here, in all of the halakhot pertaining to a tent over a corpse, the threads must be twisted and their threads folded 6 times. The verse states the word tent, tent several times to amplify and include even a tent made of linen not identical to the Tabernacle. The Talmud asks: If the repetition of the word tent, tent several times amplifies, even all things should be included among those items that can receive ritual impurity as a tent. The Talmud answers: This amplification cannot be that far-reaching, as, if so, the verbal analogy of tent, tent, that teaches us to derive the tent over a corpse from the Tabernacle, what purpose does it serve if everything is included? Rather, certainly the amplification is not absolute. Through the combination of the verbal analogy and the amplification, it is derived that this halakha applies specifically to linen.