Why does the Torah insert the word "Kol Zachar"?
Rashi and Ramban (ciing Zevachim, 98b): To include Ba'alei -Mumin in the distribution. 1
Rashi: Since the concession of eating Kodshei Kodshim we already know from a Pasuk in Emor (See 21:22). Moshav Zekenim - The Sifra learns from "va'Charevah? Ish ke'Achiv" that a Ba'al Mum receives a portion, but a Katan does not.
What are the implications of the phrase "Kol asher Yiga bahem Yikdash"?
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes that "Kol asher Yiga bahem Yikdash" teaches us that what absorbs from a Minchah adopts the Din of a Minchah. But the Gemara in Pesachim, 45a learns the same thing regarding a Chatas from "Kol asher Yiga bi'Vesarah Yikdash" - in Pasuk 20. Why us this not a case of 'Sh'nei Kesuvim ha'Ba'im ke'Echad' - from which we cannot learn on to other cases.
Korban Aharon #1 (on the Sifra, Perek 3:6): We need the current Pasuk "bahem" to teach us that it is not forbidden through mere touching, only if it absorbs the taste, and the Pasuk "bi'Vesarah", that it is forbidden only if the Heter absorbs the taste of the Is.
Korban Aharon #2 (on the Sifra, Sof Perek 5): If we had only the Pasuk of Chatas, we would say that meat (lard) renders Asur because it is absorbed deep into the other food - Shelamim), but a Minchah is not. If we had only the Pasuk of Minchah, which is soft, we would think that it is absorbed deep into other food, but a Chatas is not.
Beis She'arim (OC 167): The Sha'ar ha'Melech asks how the Gemara in Pesachim can use the Pasuk of Chatas for Sh'nei Kesuvim ha'Ba'im ke'Echad (that Heter joins with Isur), seeing as it is needed for an Isur Asei, since the Asei of eating Kodshim would otherwise override the La'av (for a Zar to eat what whatever absorbed Kodshey Kodshim). "Kol asher Yiga bi'Vesarah Yikdash" is therefore needed to add an Asei to the Lo'Sa'aseh.
