The rishon, sheni, and shlishi of sacrificial foods are tamei and contaminate with tumah; the revi’i disqualifies but does not con-taminate with tumah; and the chamishi may be eaten in a dish containing sacrificial food.

The sheni of chullin conveys tumah to chullin liquids and disqualifies terumah foods. The shlishi of terumah conveys tumah to sacrificial liquids and disqualifies sacrificial foods, where [the terumah foods] were made to the taharah standards of sacrificial things. But if they were made to the taharah standards of terumah, it contaminates two and disqualifies one with sacrificial things.

R’ Eliezer says: The three of them are equal. The rishon of sacrificial things, terumah, and chullin conveys tumah to two and dis-qualifies one with regard to sacrificial things; it conveys tumah to one and disqualifies one with regard to terumah; and it dis-qualifies chullin.  The sheni of all of them conveys tumah to one and disqualifies one with sacrificial things; it conveys tu-mah to chullin liquids; and disqualifies terumah foods.  The shlishi with all of them conveys tumah to sacrificial liquids, and disqualifies sacrificial foods.

Someone who eats a sheni food should not work in the oil press. And chullin foods that were made to the standard of sacrificial foods —- these are like chullin. R’ Eliezer bar R’ Tzadok says: They are like terumah, to convey tumah to two and disqualify one.

Gravy, bean stew, and milk, when they are liquid [enough] to moisten, they are beginning level [of tumah]. [If] they congeal, they are shenis. [If] they dissolved again, [if their size is] exactly an egg’s volume, [they are] tahor. [If they consist of] more than an egg’s volume, [they are] tamei, for as soon as the first drop emerges, it is rendered tamei by an egg’s volume [of food].

R’ Meir says: Oil is always beginning level [of tumah]. And the Sages say: Even honey. R’ Shimon Shezuri says: Even wine.  [Regarding] a mass of olives which fell into an oven and [the oven] was kindled, [if the mass consists of] exactly an egg’s volume [of olives], [the oven] is tahor. [If the mass consists of] more than an egg’s volume [of olives], [the oven] is tamei, for as soon as the first drop [of oil] emerges, it is rendered tamei by an egg’s volume [of food]. If [the olives] were separate, even if they con-sist of a se’ah, [the oven] is tahor.

[Regarding] one contaminated with corpse tumah who squeezed olives or grapes, [if the olives or grapes consist of] exactly an egg’s volume, [the extracted liquid] is tahor, provided that he does not touch the place of the liquid. [If the grapes or olives con-sist of] more than an egg’s volume, [the juice] is tamei, since as soon as the first drop emerges, it is rendered tamei by an egg’s volume [of “food”]. If he was a zav or a zavah, even [if he squeezed only] a single fruit, [the liquid] is tamei, for as soon as the first drop emerges, it is rendered tamei through being carried [by the zav or zavah].  [Regarding] a zav who milked a goat, the milk is tamei, for as soon as the first drop emerges, it is rendered tamei through being carried [by the zav].

[Regarding] an egg’s volume of food that one placed in the sun and it shrank, and similarly an olive’s volume of a corpse, an ol-ive’s volume of an animal carcass, or a lentil’s volume of a sheretz, [and] an olive’s volume of piggul, an olive’s volume of nossar, [or] an olive’s volume of cheilev, these are tahor, and one is not liable on their account for [consuming] piggul, nossar, and tamei.  [If] he placed them in the rain and they swelled, they are tamei, and one is liable on their account for [consuming] piggul, nossar, and tamei.

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.

[If] one throws tumah from place to place, [whether he throws] a loaf among keys, [or] a key among loaves, [the loaves are] ta-hor. R’ Yehudah says: [If one throws] a loaf among keys, [the loaf is] tamei. [But if one throws] a key among loaves, [the loaves are] tahor.

[If] a sheretz was in the mouth of a weasel and [the weasel] was walking over bread loaves of terumah, [and] it is questionable whether it touched [the loaves or] did not touch [them], this doubt is [ruled] tahor.

[If] a sheretz was in the mouth of a weasel, or a neveilah in the mouth of a dog, and they passed between tahor [people], or ta-hor [people] passed between them, this doubt is [ruled] tahor, since the tumah does not have a place. [If] they were picking at [the sheretz or neveilah] on the ground, and [a tahor person] said, “I walked to that place but I do not know whether I touched [the tamei item] or did not touch [it],” the uncertainty is [ruled] tamei, because the tumah has a place.

[If] an olive’s volume of a human corpse was in the mouth of a raven, [and] it is uncertain whether it formed a roof over a per-son or over utensils in a private domain, the uncertainty [regarding] a person is [ruled] tamei; the uncertainty [regarding] uten-sils is [ruled] tahor.  [If] one fills ten buckets [of water] and a sheretz is found in one of [the buckets], it is tamei; all [the oth-ers] are tahor.  [If] one pours [water] from [one] vessel to [another] vessel, and a sheretz is found in the lower [vessel], the upper [one] is tahor.

On account of six cases of [tumah] un-certainty we burn terumah: on account of the [tumah] uncertainty of a beis hapras, and on account of the [tumah] uncertainty of earth which comes from the Land of the Nations, on account of the [tumah] uncer-tainty of garments of an am haaretz, on account of the [tumah] uncertainty of utensils that are found, on account of the [tu-mah] uncertainty of spittle that is found, [and] on account of the [tumah] uncertainty of human urine which is in proximity to animal urine. On account of definite contact [with these items] which constitutes a question of tumah, we burn terumah. R’ Yose says: Also on account of a questionable contact in a private domain. But the Sages say: In the private domain we suspend [terumah]; in the public domain it is tahor.