Yoma 72A

כליל תכלת״, ויליף ״תכלת״ ״תכלת״ מפרוכת: מה להלן ששה, אף כאן ששה.

spun of tekhelet” (Exodus 28:31). And derive a verbal analogy from the term “tekhelet” used here and the same term “tekhelet” from the verse about the curtain: Just as there, with regard to the curtain, there are 6 strands, so too here, there are 6 strands. Then, since the Torah also says the threads are spun, i.e., each strand is made of two thinner strands spun together, each thread must contain 12 strands.

ונילף משוליו ורמוניו ⁠— מה להלן שמונה, אף כאן שמונה! דנין כלי מכלי, ואין דנין כלי מתכשיט כלי.

The Talmud suggests: Let us derive the number of strands in the robe from its hem and pomegranates: Just as there, each thread is spun from 8 strands, so too here, the threads should be spun from 8 strands. The Talmud rejects this: It is preferable to derive the halakhot of a utensil, i.e., the robe, from the halakhot of another utensil, i.e., the curtain, and one should not derive the halakhot of a utensil from the halakhot of something that is merely an ornament of a utensil, i.e., the pomegranates of the robe.

אדרבה: דנין גופו מגופו, ואין דנין גופו מעלמא. היינו דאמרינן: לשאר בגדים שלא נאמר בהן ״שש״.

The Talmud asks: On the contrary, it is preferable to derive the halakhot of an object from that object itself, i.e., to assume that the halakhot of the robe and its pomegranates are similar; and one should not derive the halakhot of an object from elsewhere. The Talmud explains: This is precisely what we said in the baraita: One of the 5 mentions of shesh in the verse is to teach that the requirement that threads be made from 6 strands applies also to other garments about which shesh is not explicitly stated, such as the robe.