Commentary for Bava Kamma 210:16

למאי הלכתא רב אמי אמר רבי חנינא לפטור ושמואל אמר לחיוב

maintained that a matter which might merely cause some pecuniary liability<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., such as where the evidence in question would not directly have any bearing upon a pecuniary matter but might indirectly at a subsequent stage bring about a pecuniary liability; this is so in the case of one witness whose evidence is not sufficient to establish pecuniary liabilities as stated in Deut. XIX, 15, but whose testimony is accepted for the purpose of imposing an oath upon a defendant who, if unprepared to swear, would have to make full payment; v. Shebu. 40a and 41a. ');">²⁴</span> is regarded in law as directly touching upon money.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the law of Lev. V, 1 has to apply. ');">²⁵</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Kamma 210:16. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.