In what [cases] are [the previous] things said? With a Kohen who inquires. But with a Kohen who does not inquire, [if there was] one [pair of obligatory bird-offerings] for this woman and one [pair] for that one, [or] two [pairs] for this woman and two [pairs] for that one, [or] three [pairs] for this woman and three [pairs] for that one —- [if] he made them all above [the Red Line], half [of the mingled offerings] are valid and half [of them] are invalid; [if] he made them all below [the Red Line], half [of the mingled offerings] are valid and half [of them] are invalid. [If] he made half of them above [the Red Line] and half of them below [the Red Line], [of] those [offerings] which were made above [the Red Line], half are valid and half are invalid; and [of] those [offerings] which were made below [the Red Line], half are valid and half are invalid.

If one woman has one [pair of obligatory bird-offerings], and another woman has two [such pairs], and another woman has three [such pairs], and another woman has ten [such pairs], and another woman has one hundred [such pairs] —- [if the Kohen] made all of them above [the Red Line], half [of the mingled offerings] are valid and half [of them] are invalid; [if he made] all of them below [the Red Line], half [of the mingled offerings] are valid and half [of them] are invalid. [If he made] half of them above [the Red Line] and half of them below [the Red Line], [the number of pairs in] the largest group is valid.  This is the rule: Every situation in which you can divide the pairs [in a way] that one woman’s [bird-offerings] will not be both above [the Red Line] and below [the Red Line], [then] half [of the mingled offerings] are valid and half [of them] are invalid. [And] any situation in which you cannot divide the pairs other than [in a way] that one woman’s [bird-offerings] will be both above [the Red Line] and below [the Red Line], [then the number of pairs in] the largest group is valid.

[If there was] a chatas bird for this woman and an olah bird for this one [which mingled together], —- [if the Kohen] offered all of them above [the Red Line], half [of this pair] is valid and half is invalid; [if he offered] all of them below [the Red Line], half [of this pair] is valid and half is invalid]. [If he offered] half [of the pair] above [the Red Line] and half below below the Red Line, both are invalid, because I [can] say [that] the chatas was [the one] offered above and the olah [was the one offered] below.

[If there was] a chatas bird and an olah bird, as well as an undesignated pair and a designated pair —- [if] he made all of them above [the Red Line], half [of each of these pairs] is valid and half [of each of these pairs] is invalid; [if] he made all of them below [the Red Line], half [of each of these pairs] is valid and half [of each of these pairs] is invalid. [If] he made half of them above [the Red Line] and half of them below [the Red Line,] none is valid except for the undesignated pair, and that [pair] is divided between them.

[If] chatas birds mingled with obligatory pairs, only the number of chatas birds in the obligatory pairs are valid. [If] the [bird-offerings in the] obligatory pairs [were] twice as many as the chatas birds, half [of the offerings] are valid and half are invalid. But [if] the chatas birds were twice as many as the [bird-offerings in the] obligatory pairs, [the number of offerings equal to] the number of birds in the obligatory pairs are valid.  Similarly, [if] olah birds mingled with [an equal number of bird-offerings in] obligatory pairs, only the number of olah birds in the obligatory pairs are valid. [If] the [bird-offerings in the] obligatory pairs [were] twice as many as the olah birds, half [of the offerings] are valid and half are invalid. [If] the olah birds [were] twice as many as the [bird-offerings in the] obligatory pairs, [the number of offerings equal to] the number of birds in the obligatory pairs are valid.

[If] a woman said: “It is hereby incumbent upon me to bring a pair of birds [as donated olos] when I give birth to a boy”: [If] she gave birth to a boy, she must bring two pairs [of bird-offerings] —- one [pair] for her vow and one [pair] for her obligation.  [If] she gave them to a Kohen —- and the Kohen is supposed to offer three birds above [the Red Line] and one below [it] —- [if] he did not do so, rather, he offered two [of these birds] a-bove and two [of them] below, without inquiring, she must [now] bring one more bird, which [the Kohen] should offer above [the Red Line]. [This is the rule if the two pairs were both] of one species. [If, however, they were] of two species, she must [now] bring two [additional birds].  [If] she [had] specified [the species of birds with which to fulfill] her vow, she must [now] bring another three birds [as olos]. [This is the rule if the original two pairs were both] of one species. [If they were] of two species, she must [now] bring four [additional birds as olos].  [If] she affixed her vow, she must [now] bring another five birds. [This is the rule if the original two pairs were both] of one species. [If they were] of two species, she must [now] bring another six [birds].  [If] she gave them to a Kohen but it is not known what [species of birds] she gave, [and] the Kohen went and offered [them] but it is not known [exactly] what he did [with them], she must [now] bring another four birds for her vow, two [more birds] for [the olah of] her [childbirth] obligation, and one [more] chatas [for her childbirth obligation]. Ben Azzai says: [She must bring] two chataos.  R’ Yehoshua said: This is [analogous to] what [people] have said [regarding a ram]: “While he is alive his voice is one, and when he is dead his voice is seven!” How is it that his voice is seven [after he dies]? His two horns [can serve as] two trumpets, his two thigh [bones as] two flutes, his hide for a drum, his stomachs for [the sound boxes of] lyres [and] his intestines for harp-strings. And some say: His wool, too, [can serve] for techeiles.  R’ Shimon ben Akashia says: Elderly unlearned men, as they continue to age their minds get more confused; as is stated (Job 12:20): He removes the speech of the capable and takes away the reasoning of the elderly. But elders of Torah are not like that; rather, as they continue to age their minds become even more settled; as is stated (ibid 12:12): In the aged is wisdom and [in] length of days, understanding.