All [uncertainties of] tumah are [decided] according to [their status at] the time of their discovery. If they are [found in a] tamei [state], they are [assumed to have been] tamei. And if they are [found in a] tahor [state], they are [assumed to have been] ta-hor. If they are [found] covered, they are [assumed to have been] covered. If they are [found] uncovered, they are [assumed to have been] uncovered.  [If] a needle was found full of rust or broken, it is tahor. For all [uncertainties of] tumah are [de-cided] according to [their status at] the time of their discovery.

[Regarding] a deaf person, a deranged person or a minor who was found in an alleyway containing tumah, they are presumed to be tahor. But any lucid person is presumed tamei. For anything which does not have the intellect to be questioned, his uncer-tainties [of tumah] are tahor.

[Regarding] a child who is found by the side of a cemetery and roses are in his hand, and there are no roses except at the site of the tumah, [he is deemed] tahor, for I say [that] another [person] picked them and gave [them] to him. And simi-larly [if] a don-key [is found] between the graves, his harness is tahor.

[Regarding] a child who was found next to a dough and there is [a piece of] dough in his hand, R’ Meir rules [the dough] tahor. But the Sages rule [it] tamei, because it is the nature of a child to pat [dough].  [Regarding] a dough which has chickens’ peck marks, and there is tamei liquid inside the house, if there is [space] between the liquid and the loaves for [the chickens] to dry their mouths on the ground, [the dough] is tahor. And as regards a cow or a dog, [if there is sufficient space] for it to lick [its lips with] its tongue. And [as regards] all other animals, [if there is space enough] for [the liquid] to dry. R’ Eliezer ben Yaakov declares [the dough] tahor in the case of a dog, for it is intelligent, and it is not its nature to leave aside food and go to water.