What is this Pasuk coming to add to the afore-mentioned obligation of bringing one's Korbanos to the place that Hashem will choose?
Rashi: It comes to add a La'av to someone who transgresses the Asei.
Seeing as the Torah will write ?ve?Sham Ta?aseh es Kol asher Anochi Metzveka? to include all Korbanos, why does the Torah here mention specifically Olos?
Sifri: To teach us that, just as Olos are subject to an Asei (See Pasuk 14) and a Lo Sa'aseh, so too are all other Korbanos, which are subject to an Asei (Ibid.), are also subject to
Oznayim la'Torah: Because, having said in Pasuk 7, "Va'achaltem Sham", we might have thought that it is specifically Korbanos that are eaten - either by Kohanim or by the owners, need to brought to the Beis-Hamikash because one cannot compare wht one eats before Hashem to what one eats in one's own home, but that Olos that are brought entirely on the Mizbe'ach, are equally valid wherever they are brought.
Why does the Torah add the (otherwise superfluous) words "be?Chol Makom asher Tir'eh"?
Rashi: To extrapolate that one is permitted to bring Korbanos elsewhere upon the instructions of a Navi. 1
Zevachim, 118a: To extrapolate that, when Yisrael arrive in Shiloh, they are not allowed to bring Korbanos in a location where they can see the Mishkan,, but they are allowed to eat Kodshim Kalim and Ma'aser Sheini wherever they can see it.
Rashi: As they ultimately did on Har ha'Carmel upon the instructions of Eliyahu ha'Navi. See also Torah Temimah, note 42. See also Oznayim la'Torah, DH 'be'Chol Makom asher Tir'eh'.
