[If] one performed melikah on a bird chatas for a designation other than its own, [or] drained its blood for a designation other than its own, or for its own designation and for a designation other than its own, or for a designation other than its own and for its own designation, it is invalid. A bird olah [under such circumstances] is valid, except that it is not credited to the owner. Both a bird chatas and a bird olah on which one performed melikah or drained their blood, with the intent to eat that which is meant to be eaten, or to burn upon the Altar that which is meant to be burnt upon the Altar — outside their area, they are invalid but there is no kares [punishment]; beyond their time, they are piggul and one is liable to kares for them, provided that the part which makes it permissible has been offered as required. In what manner is the part which makes it permissible [considered to have] been offered as required? [If] he performed melikah in silence but drained the blood [with an intent for] beyond its time; or he performed melikah [with an intent for] beyond its time and drained the blood in silence, or he performed melikah and drained the blood [both with an intent for] beyond its time — these are [cases in] which the part which makes it permissible is [considered to have been] offered as required. In what manner is the part which makes it permissible not [considered to have] been offered as required? [If] he performed melikah [for] outside its place but drained the blood [for] beyond its time; or he performed melikah [for] beyond its time but drained the blood [for] outside its place; or he performed melikah and drained the blood [both for] outside its place; [or] a bird chatas on which he performed melikah for a designation other than its own, and drained its blood [with an intent for] beyond its time; or on which he performed melikah [with an intent for] beyond its time, and drained its blood for a designation other than its own; or he performed melikah on it and drained its blood for a designation other than its own — these are [cases in] which the part which makes it permissible has not been offered as required. [If] he [intended] to eat an olive’s volume outside and an olive’s volume tomorrow, [or] an olive’s volume tomorrow and an olive’s volume outside; [or he intended to eat] half an olive’s volume outside and half an olive’s volume tomorrow, [or] half an olive’s volume tomorrow and half an olive’s volume outside — it is invalid, but it bears no kares [punishment]. Said R’ Yehudah: This is the rule: If the intent of time preceded the intent of place, [it is] piggul and one is liable to kares for it; but if the intent of place preceded the intent of time, it is invalid, but bears no kares [punishment]. But the Sages say: In either case it is invalid, but bears no kares [punishment]. [If the intent was] to eat half an olive’s volume and to burn upon the Altar half an olive’s volume, it is valid, because [intent for] eating and Altar-burning do not combine.