I would appreciate knowing if the Kollel can find any commentary on Gemara concerned by two drashos learning out different things from the same word "osoh" in the same passuk.

Since there is a principle, apparently, that a given word can only be used for one drasha, when I got to the second one on 75b, on a different mishna, I looked into this. The first one is on the bottom of 75a.

The closest we found is that Toras Kohanim says that the first drasha doesn't need a drasha, it can be deduced logically. Perhaps this issue is what compelled him to say this?

Is there any other commentary?

Alternatively, Artscroll apparently says that the word osoh is superfluous, in "Posos osoh pitim" but if it weren't there, we would need a "lamed" before pitim. Perhaps I could justify two drashos that one is on the "positive" extra word, and the other on the "negative" missing word/letter? (similar to the principle that a negative mitzvah implies a positive mitzvah?)

Are there any other cases of passukim in Chumash where a 'lamed' is missing that would mean the same thing, and ideally an extra "osoh" in its place?

To be clear its the Torah Temima's citations #34 and #35 in the 2nd perek of Vayikra that brought me to this observation.

#34 on 75a says that the Gemara learns out from "osoh" to exclude the 2 loaves and the showbreads. #35 on 75b says that the Gemara learns out from "osoh" to not break it into crumbs.

I'm hoping to find out if any of these reasonings can be found in commentary on these gemaras.

--Chaim Chesler