במה דברים אמורים בכהן נמלך (under what circumstances do the rules apply? In the case of a Kohen who makes inquiry) – It is referring to the first chapter [of Tractate Kinnim, Mishnayot 2-3]. And this is what we stated: Under what circumstances do the rules apply? That a sin-offering that was combined/mixed with a burnt-offering that all of them should be left to die, and similarly, one to this one and two to that one and the third to that one, that the minority is Kosher/fit, these words regard a Kohen that comes to inquire and to ask what is their law. But a Kohen who does not inquire and acted according to this own knowledge, one complete couple of sacrificial birds above [the red line] for one woman, the burnt offering is kosher/fit but the sin-offering is invalid. But if he made [an offering of] one complete couple of sacrificial birds below [the red line], the sin-offering is valid and the burnt-offering is invalid. Therefore, one (i.e., sin-offering) for this one [woman] and one (i.e., burnt-offering) for that one [woman, two [complete couples of sacrificial birds] for this one [woman] (i.e., sin-offering) and two [complete couples of sacrificial birds] for that one [woman] (i.e., burnt-offering) and made all of them, above [the red line], half are kosher which are the burnt-offerings and half of them are invalid which are sin-offerings. But if he made [an offering of] all of them, below [the red line], the sin-offerings are kosher/fit but the burnt-offerings are invalid. And all of the first chapter [of Tractate Kinnim] speaks of ab initio, but this chapter speaks of post-facto/after-the-fact. And one [burnt-offering] to this woman and two [burnt-offerings] to that woman, that we stated above when he (i.e., the Kohen) makes inquiry, the minority are kosher, here without inquiry, the majority are kosher/fit, since he (i.e., the Kohen) made [the offering of] half of them above [the red line] and half of them below [the red line]. How so? Behold that from one [sin-offering] for this [woman], he (i.e., the Kohen) made that couple of bird-offerings of [this] woman above [the red line] and from two couples of bird-offerings of another woman, he (i.e., the Kohen) made one individual pigeon from them above [the red line] in order that half of them would be above, and there remained three individual pigeons below [the red line], behold two burnt-offerings above [the red line] ae kosher/fit, and two sin-offerings below [the red line], behold two couples of bird-offerings are kosher/fit, and the third is invalid, and this is the majority that is kosher. And similarly, two [couples of bird-offerings] for this woman and three [couples of bird-offerings] for that woman, from the two couples of bird-offerings, there are four individual pigeons [offered] above [the red line], and furthermore, he (i.e., the Kohen) took one individual pigeon from the three couples of bird offerings, there are five individual pigeons [offered] above [the red line] and five [individual pigeons offered] below [the red line]; from the five individual pigeons [offered] above [the red line], there are three burnt-offerings and from [that offered] below [the red line] there are three sin-offerings, behold three couples of bird-offerings are kosher, and this is the majority that are kosher/fit, but however, ten [couples of bird-offerings] for this [woman] and one-hundred [couples of bird-offerings] for that [woman], it is impossible to find in this matter because they are pairs, and one needs to state that the majority are kosher/fit, as is taught in our Mishnah, he does not return ought other than one to this [woman] and two to that [woman], etc., which are not pairs, but since it is taught in the Mishnah above that in this manner the minority are kosher/fit, it also teaches in this manner that the majority are kosher/fit without making inquiry. But however, even with ten [couples of sacrificial birds] to this [woman] and one-hundred [couples of sacrificial birds] to that [woman], the majority are kosher, for there is nothing invalid from them other than ten [couples of sacrificial birds], for perhaps all of the couples of sacrificial birds were of one woman [offered] above [the red line] and the sin-offerings were invalidated, or all of them [were offered] below [the red line] and the burnt-offerings were invalidated, by force, ten complete couples of bird-sacrifices are invalid.

את שלמעלה מחצה כשר ומחצה פסול – [half of them are kosher/fit and half are invalid] since he (i.e., the Kohen) made [the offering up] of a complete couple of bird-offerings above [the red line]. For since these couples of bird-offerings were for two women, they should bring another couple of bird-offerings in partnership and give them between them, if from the first is a burnt-offering for Leah, the let the last be a sin-offering for Leah, or its opposite. And specifically, he (i.e., the Kohen) made [the offering of] a complete couple of bird-offerings above [the red line], but if he split up/divided the couples of bird-offerings, one individual pigeon above [the red line] and one individual pigeon below [the red line] everything is Kosher, for I state that the burnt-offering is above [the red line] and the sin-offering is below [the red line], for the couples of bird-offerings are specified through the action of the Kohen.

זה הכלל כל מקום שאתה יכול לחלוק כו' – meaning to say, that the couple of sacrificial-birds of one woman is not divided in half, but rather one couple of sacrificial birds [is offered] above [the red line] and another woman’s couple of sacrificial birds [is offered] below [the red line], half of it is kosher/fit and half of it is invalid.

וכל מקום כו' – as for example, one [couple of sacrificial birds] to this [woman] and two [couples of sacrificial birds] to that [woman] where there is a division of one woman’s [couple of sacrificial birds to be offered] above [the red line] and below [the red line], the majority are kosher, as has been explained.

חטאת לזו ועולה לזו – this also refers to that which is taught above in the first chapter [of Tractate Kinnim, Mishnah 3], a burnt-offering that became mixed/combined with a sin-offering or the opposite, all of them are left to die. And these words [apply] when [the priest] made inquiry on the mixture and made [the offering] of one couple of sacrificial birds above [the red line] and one couple of sacrificial birds below [the red line], half of them are kosher/fit and half of them are invalid. But even though that he did not come to make inquiry, we state to him that he (i.e., the Kohen) should not offer them up, as it is taught, they should all be left to die, now that he didn’t make any inquiry, we state that each one should be performed according to Halakha and they are kosher/fit.

חטאת ועולה וסתומה ומפורשת – two women who purchased three couples of sacrificial birds, this one (i.e., woman) needs a burnt offering and a complete couple of sacrificial birds, that is two burnt-offerings and one sin-offering, and the second [woman] needs one sin offering and one complete couple of sacrificial birds, which are two sin-offerings and one burnt-offering, and they designated/specified one individual pigeon from the couple of sacrificial birds for a burnt-offering for this one (i.e., woman) and one individual pigeon as a sin-offering for that one [woman], and one from the couple of sacrificial birds they left undesignated , for they didn’t specify which would be for a burnt-offering and which for a sin-offering. But the third [woman] they designated/specified which was for a burnt-offering and which was for a sin-offering, but the owners didn’t specify behold a sin-offering for this [woman] and a burnt-offering for that one [woman] and an undesignated couple of sacrificial birds and a designated couple of sacrificial birds, and he (i.e., the Kohen) needs to offer up as a sacrifice these two couples of sacrificial birds undesignated for both of them, the burnt-offerings above [the red line] and the sin-offerings below [the red line], and a burnt-offering for this one [woman] and a sin-offering for that [woman] he needs to offer in the name of the owners. But if the Kohen gave them, one-half below [the red line] and one-half above [the red line], none are kosher/fit other than the undesignated ones, which type did he made as a burnt-offering and which type did he make as a sin-offering, it is kosher/fit, since each couple of sacrificial birds was of its own.

מתחלקת בימיהם – since he purchased them in a mixture, the one fulfilled for the sin-offering and the other fulfilled for the burnt-offering.

חטאת שנתערבה בחובה – that is to say, that which we taught above in the Chapter One [Tractate Kinnim, Mishnah two] a sin-offering that was combined/confused with an obligatory sacrifice is not kosher/fit other than only the number corresponding to the sin-offerings among [the offerings brought in fulfillment of] an obligation, that sometimes, that number goes up to half kosher/fit and half invalid, and sometimes it goes to less than half, and it will explain further on how so.

חובה שנים בחטאת מחצה כשר ומחצה פסול – explanation, two couples of bird sacrifices for an obligation they have twice as many as that brought for a sin-offering, as for example, that he offered up as a sacrifice from them one burnt-offering and there remained two sin-offerings and one burnt-offering.

מחצה כשר ומחצה פסול – that one burnt-offering that remains cannot be offered lest this is the one that is set for a sin-offering, and a sin-offering that is confused/combined he (i.e., the Kohen) cannot offer up lest it is the remaining burnt-offering, therefore he does not offer up ought other than two sin-offerings, but the sin-offering that is confused/combined and the burnt-offering that remains are invalid, and this is half of them are kosher/fit and half of them are invalid.

חטאת שנים בחובה מנין שבחובה כשר – explanation, as for example, that she offered up one sin-offering from the two couples of bird sacrifices and there remained two burnt-offerings and one sin-offering. Behold they are four individual pigeons with the sin-offering that was confused/mixed up between them, and he is not able to offer up two burnt-offerings lest he take the confused/mixed-up sin-offering, and also he cannot offer up two sin-offerings lest he take that [bird] that is set for the burnt-offering, therefore, he doesn’t sacrifice anything other than one sin-offering, for the burnt-offering of that is the lesser number that is the less than that which is half-kosher/fit. And in a similar manner we explain also and similarly the burnt-offering that was confused/mixed-up with an obligatory sacrifice.

הרי עלי קן לכשאלד זכר – we are dealing with a poor woman who gave birth, whereas if she was rich, she brings a sheep for her obligatory offering.

והכהן צריך לעשות שלש למעלה -that the couple of sacrificial birds for a free-will offering – both of them are burnt-offerings and the couple of sacrificial birds of the obligatory sacrifice is a burnt-offering above [the red line] and a sin-offering below [the red line], but he did not do so, but rather two [burnt-offerings] above [the red line] and two [sin-offerings] below, and he did not make inquiry with her to know on what she brought, and one individual pigeon was invalidated, therefore, she needs to bring another individual pigeon and she will offer it above [the red line].

ממין אחד – that is to say, in what case is this statement said, when they (i.e., the birds) were of one kind. But if there were two couples of sacrificial birds that she brought from two different species, that is, one couple of sacrificial birds that are turtle-doves and another that are pigeons, she must bring one individual turtle-dove and one individual pigeon, in order to replace the individual bird that was invalidated, and we don’t know if it was from the turtle-doves or from the pigeons, and it is taught in the Mishnah above (see Tractate Kinnin, Chapter 2, Mishnah 5): “They do not bring turtle-doves to make up pairs for young pigeons, or young pigeons to make up pairs for turtle-doves.”

פירשה נדרה - when she brought two couples of bird sacrifices to the Kohen, she specified and stated: "these are for my vow, and those are for my obligation [sacrifice]."

ממין אחד – meaning to say, if these two couples of bird sacrifices were from one species, that is, both of them were turtle-doves or both of them pigeons, and the Kohen offered from them two above [the red line] and two below [the red line], only one individual pigeon is kosher from all of the four that he sacrificed, and it is the burnt-offering that is the obligatory sacrifice, and she needs to bring three more individual pigeons and he (i.e., the Kohen) offers them one below [the red line] which is the sin-offering that is in the obligatory [sacrifice] and two above [the red line] and this is the vow.

משני מינים תביא ארבע – if she brought two couples of two bird sacrifices from two species and specified in her vow but the Kohen did not know which two them he performed (i.e., sprinkled the blood of) above [the red line] and which two of them he performed (i.e., sprinkled the blood of) below [the red line], she needs to bring four individual birds, for perhaps the two turtle-doves that she brought for her vow and they are burnt-offerings were performed below [the red line] and there remains for her the entire vow [to be fulfilled]. But the two pigeons which are obligatory were performed above [the red line] and the remains for her one pigeon for the sin-offering of her obligation, or perhaps the two pigeons of her obligation were performed below [the red line] and there remains upon her the pigeon of the burnt-offering from her obligatory [sacrifice].

קבעה נדרה – as for example, that she said at the time of vow: “I pledge upon myself a couple of sacrificial birds from a certain species, and she specified her vow as [mentioned] above, she did not specify anything at the time of the vow, but rather after she made an unspecified vow: “I pledge upon myself a couple of sacrificial birds,” she brought from whichever species that she wanted and stated: “these are for my vow.”

צריכה להביא עוד חמש פרידות – here we are speaking as for example, that after she established her vow and brought her vow with her obligatory [sacrifice] to the Kohen, the Kohen executed two [sprinklings of the blood of the sacrificial birds] above [the red line] and two [sprinklings of the blood of the sacrificial birds] below [the red line] and he did not know if he executed her vow above [the red line] and her obligatory sacrifice below [the red line] if [not] the opposite, and she also forgot which species [of birds] she established for her vow, whether turtle-doves or pigeons, she needs to bring another five single pigeons, for perhaps the vow was executed/performed below [the red line] and the obligatory [sacrifice] was executed above [the red line] and none of it was kosher/fit except the burnt-offering that is part of the obligatory offering alone and there remains upon her the sin-offering of the obligatory sacrifice and two burnt-offerings of the vow, but because she forgot which species [of birds] she established for her vow, she needs to bring two turtle doves and two pigeons and to execute/perform [the sprinkling of the blood] for all of them above [the red line] in order to fulfill her [sacrificial] obligation regarding her vow, and she also needs to bring a pigeon or a turtle dove for the sin-offering to complete her obligatory [sacrifice], hence five individual pigeons. And these words, when she brought from the outset her vow and her obligatory sacrifice, all of them were from one species [of birds]. But if she knew that at the outset that she brought her vow and her obligatory sacrifices from two kinds and she forgot from which species she established her vows, she needs to bring six individual pigeons, four [of them] to complete her vow, that is two turtle doves and two pigeons as we stated above, since she doesn’t know from which species she established her vow and she needs to fulfill her obligation of both of them, and the two turtle doves or the two pigeons to execute [the sprinkling of the blood] of one for a sin-offering and one for a burnt-offering to complete her obligatory sacrifice. But here we don’t say that it is enough for her with one pigeon or turtle dove for a sin-offering alone and that the burnt-offering that she offered initially will fulfill for her for the sake of her obligatory sacrifice as was stated above, for it is all well when she brought it from one species, she doesn’t need to bring [more] for the burnt-offering of her obligatory sacrifice, whichever way you turn, if those turtle doves that she established for her vow will both be executed below [the red line], if so, [the blood] of her obligatory sacrifice [was sprinkled] above [the red line] completely and she fulfilled her obligation from the burnt-offering, but if [the sprinkling of the blood of] the her obligatory sacrifice was executed as a burnt-offering below [the red line] and the sin offering above [the red line], if so, her vow also was executed [through sprinkling of blood] one above [the red line] and one below [the red line] and she fulfilled her obligation of her vow through one [of the sprinklings] , and the two turtle doves that she brought now with one [of them] she fulfilled her obligation regarding her vow and with one [of them] she fulfilled her obligation regarding the burnt-offering of her obligatory sacrifice. But if her obligatory sacrifice was performed completely [through sprinkling of the blood of the birds] below [the red line] then her sin-offering is kosher/fit, and her bunt-offering is invalid, the two turtle doves that she brought now – with one of them she completed her obligatory sacrifice and with of them it was a freewill offering, but the sin-offering that she brings now, is brought in doubtful [fulfillment] and she cannot consume it. But if the first ones were doves, she should bring now for her sin-offering a pigeon, but the burnt-offering is not necessary, whichever way you turn as we stated regarding the turtle doves. But when she brought two kinds of couples of bird sacrifices and she forgot which species she established for her vow and which species she established for her obligatory [sacrifice], and she also forgot what she stated explicitly and the Kohen executed each and every species [of bird] one [whose blood was sprinkled] above [the red line] and the other below [the red line] for he would hold that both of them are unspecified obligatory [sacrifices], she will bring four for her vow – two turtle doves and two doves, because she does not know which species she established for her vow, and also two species [that she needs for the sin-offering for her pair for the burnt-offering of her obligatory sacrifice], because she doesn’t know from which species it was, and we require a turtle dove corresponding to a turtle dove and a dove corresponding to a dove.

נתנתם לכהן ואין ידוע כו' – as for example – that she established her vow and established her obligatory [sacrifice] and brought to the Kohen a couple of sacrificial birds for her vow and a couple of sacrificial birds for her obligatory [sacrifice] and she does not know from which species she established for her vow and from which species she established for her obligatory [sacrifice], or if she gave to the Kohen two species or one species and the Kohen [himself] does not know if he executed every [sprinkling of blood] above [the red line] or every [sprinkling of blood] below [the red line] or half [of them] above [the red line] and half [of them] below [the red line], behold this one brings four individual birds for her vow – two turtle doves and two pigeons, and she also brings two for her obligatory [sacrifice] – one for a sin-offering and one for a burnt-offering from whichever of the two species that she wants, and she brings a sin-offering.

אמר רבי יהושע זהו שאמרו כו' – just as when the sheep is alive, only one voice comes forth from it, but when it is dead that it would be appropriate that its voice would stop, there comes out from it seven voices as it explains further on, here also, when she initially made her vow prior to bringing anything, she did not need anything other than one couple of sacrificial birds for her vow and one couple of sacrificial birds for her obligatory [sacrifice], but after she had established her vow and brought her vow and her obligatory [sacrifice], because she doesn’t know what she established and the Kohen does not know what he offered up as a sacrifice , she needs to bring four individual birds for her vow and four for her obligatory [sacrifice] as we stated.

קרניו לחצוצרות – for Shofarot, that we call the Shofar (before the destruction of the Temple) is now called a trumpet (see Talmud Sukkah 34a).

אף צמרו – to make from it Tekhelet (i.e., the purple-blue thread used for the show-fringes on the prayer shawl). They make from its wool a coat that is entirely Tekhelet and on the skirts of the garment are bells that produces a sound/voice. The first Tanna/teacher does not consider it because the Tekhelet does not produce a sound but rather the bells that are on the skirts of the garment around it.

רבי שמעון בן עקשיא אומר – even all of this is similar to this matter, for just as when it (i.e., the animal) is dead, its voice is seven, so also the Sages of Torah, when they age and come to feebleness/weakness in [physical] strength, they add wisdom [through their teaching].

שנאמר מסיר שפה לנאמנים – but Scripture is speaking about the common, uneducated person, for further on from this it is written (Job 12:24): “He deranges the leaders of the [uneducated/common] people, [And makes them wander in a trackless waste].”

בישישים חכמה – that is the Sages, but for the uneducated/common people, what is wisdom for them?