What is "Kol Tahor be'Veischa Yochlenu" coming to include"
Yerushalmi Yevamos, 9:5: It actually comes (not to include, but) to exclude - a woman who is betrothed to a Kohen - who has not yet entered the Chupah 1 - from eating Terumah.
See Torah Temimah, note 45.
Why does the Torah not oincorporate this Din together with with the Moram min ha'Todah, Shelamim and Eil Nazir in Pasuk 11?
Oznayim la'Torah: Because of the one difference between them - a Bas Kohen whose Yisrael husband dies leaving her without children, who returns to her father's house to eat Terumah, but not Chazeh ve'Shok.
The Sifri includes the betrothed of a Kohen from "Kol Tahor be'Veischa." Why in Kidushin 5a, does Ula learn this from "Kinyan Kaspo" (Vayikra 22:11)?
Refer to Vayikra 22:11:151:1 and notes.
What do we learn from "Kol asher be'Artzam"?
Moshav Zekenim (on Devarim 26:2, citing Sifri Zuta): That one is permitted to make his entire field Bikurim, even though the Torah writes "Reishis Bikurei Admascha."
Ibn Ezra: It includes Bikurim of everything that grows from the ground. 1
Menachos 84b #1: We include things that grow on the roof, in a ruin or a flowerpot, or on a boat. 2
Menachos 84b #2: We learn via a Gezeirah Shavah 3 "Bikurei" "Bikurei" from "ve'Chag Shavu'os Ta'aseh l'cha Bikurei K'tzir Chitim" - Ki Sissa Sh'mos, 34:22 - that the Sh'tei ha'Lechem must precede Menachos brought from any new grain, even what grew on a roof, in a ruin
This is unlike Chazal, who expound that it is only from the seven species! The Ibn Ezra said in his introduction that the simple meaning does not depart due to Midrashim and that both of them are true. See also Targum Yonasan and Na'ar Yonasan.
This follows the opinion that Bikurim may be brought from inferior produce.
See Torah Temimah. Note 41.
This follows the opinion that Bikurim may not be brought from inferior produce.
See Torah Temimah, note 44.
Sifri Zuta extrapolates from here that one may make his entire field Bikurim. Why is this different than Terumah, where if one makes his entire granary Terumah, it does not take effect (since "Reishis" implies that its remainder is Discernable - Chulin 136b?
Moshav Zekenim (Devarim 26:2): We expound regarding Terumah, for even without Reishis there was no Havah Amina that one must give the entire crop to the Kohen. If so, from what will he separate Ma'aser?! However, one might have thought that all the first fruits to ripen, he must make them Bikurim.
At one point, Moshav Zekenim left this difficult, even though he said previously that we learn from "Kol"! Perhaps he asks why we do not learn Terumah from Bikurim. Indeed, some say that we learn Terumah from Chalah (refer to 15:21:151:1,2 and the note there); why do they learn from Chalah, and not from Bikurim?