Commentary for Chullin 171:42

אמר רבי יעקב אמר רבי יוחנן

For we have learnt: If a child was found by the side of dough with a piece of dough in his hand, R'Meir declares it clean but the Rabbis declare it unclean, because it is a child's nature to meddle.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Toh. III, 8; Nid. 18b; Kid. 80a. According to Rashi the interpretation is this: it is quite certain that this child has touched the dough, for he holds some in his hand, and since it is the habit of most children to meddle and play about among refuse and unclean things, this child in all probability was unclean and so rendered the rest of the dough unclean. Tosaf. interpret thus: it is quite certain that this child was unclean for he is always being fondled by women and by menstruant women too, and since it is the habit of most children to meddle with dough, this child in all probability touched the dough and so rendered it unclean. The less probable view, by taking the minority into consideration, would be to say that this child did not himself touch the dough but a piece was given to him by some person.');">²⁰</span>

Explore commentary for Chullin 171:42. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.