Related for Shevuot 65:20
ת"ש משביע אני עליכם אם לא תבואו ותעידוני
- Because of the principal.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The witnesses are liable because by withholding evidence they deprive him even of the principal.');"><sup>30</sup></span> 'FOUR OR FIVE TIMES THE AMOUNT'! - Because of the principal. - 'SO-AND-SO VIOLATED, OR SEDUCED MY DAUGHTER'!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For which a fine is imposed; Deut. XXII, 29.');"><sup>31</sup></span> - Because of the shame and deterioration.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By withholding evidence the witnesses deprive the father of compensation by the seducer (apart from the fine of 50 shekels) for the shame, iunn xbe and also for the deterioration in value of the girl (which sums are , not) . iunn xbe');"><sup>32</sup></span> What does he teach us? It is all liability!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If all the clauses in the Mishnah refer to and not , why does the Mishnah need to enumerate them all? One clause would suffice.');"><sup>33</sup></span> - The first clause teaches us one thing, and the last clause teaches us one thing. The first clause teaches us one thing, that the half indemnity of pebbles is a liability.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And because the Mishnah mentions this, it mentions also the rest (double, four or five times) , for they are equal in that they are either more or less than the principal. ihs ,hc ,,hn');"><sup>34</sup></span> The last clause teaches us one thing: 'THAT HE SET FIRE TO MY HAYSTACK ON THE DAY OF ATONEMENT' [etc.]. What does this exclude? It excludes the view of R'Nehunia B'Hakkanah, for it was taught: R'Nehunia B'Hakkanah made the Day of Atonement equivalent to the Sabbath for payment; just as on the Sabbath, etc.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because he incurs the death penalty () for setting a haystack on fire, he does not pay for the damage; so on the Day of Atonement, because he incurs the penalty of kareth, he does not pay; Keth. 30a. Our Mishnah, in stating that the witnesses are liable if they withhold evidence in the case of a man who set fire to a haystack on the Day of Atonement, obviously holds that had they given evidence he would have had to pay, hence it disagrees with R. Nehunia b. Hakkanah. This last clause is therefore inserted to exclude R. Nehunia b. Hakkanah's view.');"><sup>35</sup></span> Come and hear: 'I adjure you that you come and bear testimony for me