1) BURNING BLOOD ON THE "MIZBE'ACH"
QUESTIONS: The Mishnayos in the fourth chapter discuss how the daily Korban Tamid was sacrificed. The Mishnah relates that the Kohen would tear apart the heart and remove the blood. The reason why it was necessary to remove the blood apparently is that blood is forbidden to be eaten, and the Gemara in Pesachim (48a) derives from the verse, "mi'Mashkeh Yisrael" (Yechezkel 48:15), that only animals that are fit to be eaten by a Jew may be offered on the Mizbe'ach. Since a Jew may not eat blood, a Korban containing blood may not be burned on the Mizbe'ach.
However, this seems to contradict the Gemara in Chulin (90b) that says that even though the principle of "mi'Mashkeh Yisrael" applies, forbidden fats (Chelev) and blood are exceptions, because the Mitzvah of the Korban is to offer these items on the Mizbe'ach (see RASHI there, DH Mitzvasan b'Kach, who writes that the Chelev and Dam are the primary components of a Korban). Therefore, they are offered on the Mizbe'ach even though they are forbidden for a Jew to eat.
(a) Why, then, was it necessary for the Kohen to extract the blood from the heart before offering it on the Mizbe'ach, if the law that whatever is offered on the Mizbe'ach must be fit for a Jew's consumption does not apply to blood?
(b) The Mishnah here describes how the Kohen offered the Korban Tamid, which was a sheep offered as a Korban Olah. A similar Mishnah in Zevachim (64b) describes how the Kohen offered a bird as a Korban Olah. The Mishnah there, however, makes no mention of tearing open the heart of the bird in order to remove the blood before offering the bird on the Mizbe'ach. Why is this done only for an animal offering, but not for a bird offering?
(a) The MIKDASH DAVID (Kodshim 33:3, p. 195, DH uv'Chelev) initially suggests that only blood sprinkled for Zerikas ha'Dam is not subject to the rule that forbidden foods may not be offered on the Mizbe'ach, because the Torah specifically commands that blood be placed on the Mizbe'ach for the Mitzvah of Zerikah. This exception does not apply to blood that is not fit for Zerikah, such as Dam ha'Tamtzis (blood that leaves the animal after it has died; see Pesachim 65a, and Rashi there, DH l'Inyan, where the Gemara says that this type of blood does not provide atonement). This exception also does not apply to blood that is burned on the Mizbe'ach and not sprinkled. Accordingly, the blood of the heart may not be burned on the Mizbe'ach, and it must be removed from the heart before the heart is placed on the Mizbe'ach.
However, the ROSH here gives a different reason for why the blood of the heart must be removed. The pain of the animal at the moment of Shechitah causes the blood to go through the veins of the neck (at the point of Shechitah) into the heart (see Kerisus 22a and Rashi there, DH Misraf). This blood is considered to be like blood that fell from the neck of the animal onto the ground, and it is invalid for Zerikah because it was not received in a Kli. (The Mikdash David points out that TOSFOS in Pesachim (65a, DH Shema) also maintains that blood that was not received in a Kli is unfit for the Mizbe'ach, and it is forbidden to place such blood on the Mizbe'ach. In this respect, it is worse than Dam ha'Tamtzis, which is considered merely like water and is not forbidden to be placed on the Mizbe'ach, unlike the Mikdash David initially suggests.)
The Mikdash David explains that although the blood of the heart, if not removed, would not be sprinkled on the Mizbe'ach but merely burned there together with the heart, blood that is Pasul is forbidden to be brought on the Mizbe'ach even in a manner different from the way in which its Mitzvah is usually fulfilled (as he proves from the Gemara in Zevachim 26a).
(b) The Mikdash David answers the second question based on the words of the ROSH. As mentioned earlier, the reason why the blood of the animal is unfit for the Mizbe'ach is that it was not received in a Kli. For a bird offering, there is no Mitzvah to receive the blood in a Kli; the blood is sprinkled (or squeezed) directly from the neck of the bird onto the Mizbe'ach. Hence, the blood of a bird's heart is not considered unfit for the Mizbe'ach. This is why the Mishnah in Zevachim (64b) does not say that the blood of the heart of a bird offering must be removed. (D. BLOOM)
2) THE BINDING OF THE LEGS OF THE "TAMID"
QUESTION: The Mishnah (end of 30b) teaches that the Kohanim would not bind all four legs of the Korban together, or bind the two front legs together and the two hind legs together, in order to slaughter it. Rather, they would bind its right foreleg with its right hind leg, and its left foreleg with its left hind leg. One of the reasons for this, the Gemara says, is that binding the legs in any other manner is degrading to Kodshim.
Why is it more degrading to bind the legs in any manner other than binding the foreleg with the hind leg?
(a) The ROSH and BARTENURA explain that it is considered degrading to Kodshim to bind the forelegs together and the hind legs together, because this is the way that animals are bound when they are being sold in the market. In contrast, it is not degrading to bind the legs in an unusual manner, such as binding the foreleg with the hind leg.
(b) The RAMBAM (Hilchos Temidin u'Musafin 1:10) explains that the Gemara means that the Korban was not tied up at all. Rather, the Korban's front legs and hind legs were held by hand (which certainly is less disgraceful to the Korban).
(c) The RA'AVAD here and RABEINU GERSHOM explain that the Gemara is giving a reason for why the Kohanim did not tie all of four legs of the animal together. The Korban was not tied in such a manner because tying in such a manner completely restricts the movement of the animal, making it appear to be dead even while it is still alive, and this is disgraceful to the Korban.
What, though, was gained by tying its forelegs to its hind legs, rather than tying its forelegs together and its hind legs together? The Ra'avad suggests that perhaps tying in this manner reduced the likelihood that the animal would struggle and cause itself to become wounded and become disqualified as a Ba'al Mum (see also Ra'avad to Hilchos Temidin u'Musafin 1:10).
The VILNA GA'ON suggests that perhaps the forelegs were tied to the hind legs because this is the manner in which Avraham bound Yitzchak on the Mizbe'ach at the Akeidah. Tying the Tamid in such a manner evokes the Zechus of the Akeidas Yitzchak.