טהרות ג׳:ח׳ - ד׳:א׳

תינוק שנמצא בצד עיסה – a ritually impure child that is found at the side of started dough and a piece of this started dough was in his hand.

ר' מאיר מטהר – Rabbi Meir according to his reasoning who took into consideration the minority (i.e., the possibility of the rarer cases) and held that the majority of small children slap the started dough, and perhaps he himself took the risen dough and defiled the started dough, but the minority [of young children] do not slap but perhaps a ritually pure person took it and gave it to him, this started dough remains in the presumption of ritual purity, for this minority is near to a presumption and the majority was impaired/weakened, and it was half-and-half and that is ritually pure regarding a young child who lacks the awareness/knowledge to be interrogated.

וחכמים מטמאים – according to their rationale that they are not concerned about a minority, for most young children slap [the dough]. And the Halakha is according to the Sages.

נקירת – there are small incisions/pickings in the started dough on account of the hens that pecked in it.

שינגבו את פיהן בארץ – it is the manner of hens after they drank [water], they dry their mouths on the ground. Therefore, if there is land that forms a partition between the liquids to the loaves [of dough] in order that they can dry their mouths on it after they drank, the loaves [of dough] are ritually pure. But if not, they are impure, for they were defiled with impure liquids that were in the mouths of the hens. But even though that when the land forms a partition, we are doubtful if their mouths were dried or not, this is a doubtful defilement in a matter that there isn’t awareness/knowledge to be interrogated, and its doubt is [nevertheless deemed] ritually pure.

שהוא פיקח – for it is not his manner to drink all the time that he finds food [to consume]. For he (i.e., Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov) says that whenever liquids are found but food is not always found. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov.

הזורק. ככר לבין המטפחות – there is no difference whether he threw a ritually pure loaf among ritually impure keys, or whether he threw impure keys among the [ritually pure] loaves, and it is not known if the loaf came in contact with/touched the ritually impure keys, the loaf is ritually pure, for the [anonymous] Tanna/teacher of this Mishnah holds that someone who throws is like one who lacks the awareness/knowledge to be interrogated.

ר' יהודה אומר ככשר לבין המפתחות טמא – for Rabbi Yehuda holds that a person who throws (whether impure keys or loaves) has awareness/knowledge to be interrogated, and his [status of] doubt makes him ritually impure. However, when he threw [a ritually impure key among the loaves], it (i.e., the loaf) is ritually pure, since the defilement does not come to rest in a place but rather passes over the ritually pure [loaf], its doubt is [presumed to be] ritually pure. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda. And the [ritually pure] loaf and the [ritually impure] keys that our Mishnah uses, the same law applies for all the rest of the things that are thrown, but because it is the practice of people to throw a loaf and keys one to the other, because of that, [the Mishnah] took this [example].