R’ Eliezer says: [The term] eglah [means] within her first year and [the term] parah [means within her] second [year]. But the Sages say: [The term] eglah [means in her] second [year] while parah [means in her] third or fourth [year]. R’ Meir says: Even [in her] fifth year the elderly [cow] is acceptable, but we do not wait for her, lest she turn black, in order that it not become disqualified.  Said R’ Yehoshua: I did not hear [any term] other than “shelashis.” They said to him: What is this wording “shelashis”? He said to them: This is what I have heard without explanation. Said Ben Azai: I shall explain: If you say “shelishis,” [this means] with respect to others in a count; but if you say “shelashis,” [this means] a 3-year-old.  Similarly, they said: A reva’i vineyard. They said to him: What is this wording “reva’i”? He said to them: This is what I have heard with-out explanation. Said Ben Azai: I shall explain: If you say “revi’i,” [this means] with reference to others in a list; but when you say “reva’i,” it means four years old.  Similarly they said: If someone eats in a tzaraas-afflicted house, half a loaf of three per kav. They said to him: Say “of eighteen to a se’ah!” He said to them: So have I received without explanation. Said Ben Azzai: I shall explain: If you say “of three per kav,” there is no challah; but if you say “of eighteen per se’ah,” its challah portion reduces it.

R’ Yose HaGlili says: Parim are within their second year, as is stated (Numbers 8:8): “a second bull shall you take for a chatas-offering.” But the Sages say: Even within their third year. R’ Meir says: Even within their fourth year and even within their fifth year they are permitted, except that we do not bring older animals because of (considerations of) dignity.

Lambs [are] within their [first] year, and rams [are] within their second [year]. And [with] all of them [the year is reckoned] from [birth]day to [birth]day. A [sheep in its] thirteenth month is acceptable neither as a ram nor as a lamb. R’ Tarfon calls it a palgas. Ben Azzai calls it a nokid. R’ Yishmael calls it a parchadigma.  If he offered it, he brings with it the libations of a ram, but it does not count toward his [obliged] offering.  If it is thirteen months and a day, it is a ram.

The communal chatas-offerings, and their olah-offerings, the individual chatas-offering, the asham-offering of a nazir, and the asham-offering of a metzora are acceptable from day thirty and on, and even on day thirty. But if he offered them on the eighth day, they are acceptable.  Vowed-offerings, and donated-offerings, a firstborn, the animal tithe, and the pesach-offering are eligible from day eight and on, and even on the the eighth day.

R’ Eliezer says: A pregnant chatas cow is valid. But the Sages invalidate [it].  R’ Eliezer says: It may not be purchased from idol worshipers. But the Sages validate [it]. And not only this, but [regarding] all sacrificial offerings [both] communal and individual. [All sacrificial offerings] may be brought from [within] the Land and from outside the Land, from the new [crop] and from the old, except for the omer and the Two Loaves which may only come from the new [crop] and from the Land.

A cow whose horns or hooves [are] black, [one should] cut them off. The eyeball and the teeth and the tongue do not inval-idate the cow. A dwarf-cow [is] valid. [If] it had a wart and one cut it off, R’ Yehudah invalidates [the cow]. R’ Shimon says: Any place that [the wart] was removed and did not give rise to red hair in its place, [the cow] is disqualified.

[A cow] born by Caesarean section and a harlot’s hire and the exchange [for a dog], [it is] invalid. R’ Eliezer validates [it], for it is stated (Deuteronomy 23:19): “You shall not bring a harlot’s hire or the exchange for a dog to the House of Hashem, your G-d,” and this does not come to the House.  All the blemishes which invalidate consecrated [animals] invalidate the cow.  [If] one rode on it, leaned on it, hung from its tail, [and] crossed the river with it, folded the rope on it, placed his cloak on it, [it is] invalidated.  But if one tied it with a rope, made a shoe for it so that it should not slip, spread his cloak on it on account of the flies, [it is] valid.  This is the rule: Anything [done] for [the cow’s] need, [it is] valid; for any other need, [it is] invalid.

[If] a metzora brought his offering when [he was] poor and he became wealthy, or [he brought it] when wealthy and he became poor, everything follows the sin-offering, [these are] the words of R’ Shimon. R’ Yehudah says: [Everything] follows the guilt-offering.

A poor metzora who brought the offering of a wealthy person has fulfilled his obligation. But a wealthy person who brought the offering of a poor person has not fulfilled his obligation. A person may bring the offering of a poor person on behalf of his son, his daughter, his slave or his maidservant, and he [thereby] enables them to eat from offerings. R’ Yehudah says: Just like [a wealthy man must bring for himself the offering of the wealthy] so he must bring for his wife the offering of the wealthy. And the same holds true for any offering in which she is obligated.

[If] the offerings of two metzoraim became mixed up, [and] the offering of one of them was brought and [then] one of [the metzoraim] died. [How does one resolve this predicament?] This is the question that the people of Alexandria asked R’ Yehoshua. He said to them: [The surviving metzora]should sign over his possessions to someone else, and then bring the offering of a poor person.