Rabbi Eliezer says, [the red heifer] may not be purchased from idolaters. They said to him, it so happened that they did purchase one from among the idolaters in Sidon, and Doma was his name. Rabbi Yehuda says, we watch over her so that no one performs any work with her. They said to him, if so, there is no end to the matter -- behold, she is presumed to be fit. Rabbi Meir says, a heifer whose eyeball is black -- if there is no other heifer similar to her, she is disqualified. If they removed the horns and the hooves, and the marrow was [removed] with them, she is disqualified. If she was born via Caesarean section, she is disqualified, and Rabbi Shimon deems her fit. If she was [purchased] for the hire [of a whore] or the price [of a dog], she is disqualified, and Rabbi Eliezer deems her fit, as it is said (Deut. 23:19), "Do not bring the hire of a whore or the price of a dog into the House of the Lord your God," and this (the red heifer) is not brought into the House.

All work that render them liable as to consecrated animals [cause] the heifer to be disqualified. If he brought her into (i.e., roped her with) the team [of cattle], and she threshed with her mother, or she is yoked, then she is disqualified [whether the intention was] for work or not for work. She is redeemed for any disqualification. If she died, she must be redeemed. If she was slaughtered, she must be redeemed. If he found another more suitable than her, she must be redeemed. [But once] she has been slaughtered upon her wood pile, she can no longer be redeemed. If she was [originally purchased using] appropriation funds from the treasury, the [redemption] money goes back into the appropriation funds of the treasury.

There is a stringency with the heifer that there is not with consecrated animals, and with consecrated animals that there is not with the eglah (i.e., the calf whose neck is broken), that the eglah is disqualified with years (i.e., if she is over a year old), and work disqualifies her, which is not the case with consecrated animals.*. The GR"A provides the following emendation: "There is a stringency with the heifer that there is not with consecrated animals, and with consecrated animals that there is not with the heifer. The stringency with the heifer is that black hairs disqualify the heifer, and labor disqualifies her, which is not the case with consecrated animals. The stringency with consecrated animals is that consecrated animals may not be redeemed [etc. (see Tos. Parah 2:4)], and one who does so receives forty lashes, which is not the case with the heifer. There is a stringency with the eglah that there is not with consecrated animals, and with consecrated animals that there is not with the the eglah. The stringency with the eglah is that she is disqualified by years."

The stringency with consecrated animals is that only consecrated animals with a blemish that prevents them [from being offered up] may be redeemed, and they may not be brought out to be sheared or to work, and one who sheers them or performs work with them, behold, he receives forty lashes, which is not the case with the eglah. There is a stringency with the heifer that there is not with the eglah, and with the eglah that there is not with the heifer. [The stringency with the heifer is] that the heifer is only fit if she is red, and blemishes disqualify her, and that if work was done with her she is disqualified, which is not the case with the eglah. The stringency with the eglah is that the eglah is disqualified by years, which is not the case with the heifer.

If she had two black or white hairs within a single follicle, she is disqualified. Inside two follicles, she is fit. Rabbi Yehuda says, even [if they are] within two follicles adjacent to one another, she is disqualified.* Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam, one cuts off the tip*, and need not be concerned on account of [the prohibition against] shearing.