The Gemoro on 91a asks if we estimate for damages, and concludes that the question relates to the damaging object. The Gemoro then answers the question by bringing Shimon HaTimni, and concludes that there is estimation for damages.
My question is that on 90b we just had an argument about this, and Rebbi Akiva presented a convincing argument that the damaging object need be just seen by the witnesses. How then is Shimon HaTimni a proof to the question?
Kol Tuv,
Meir Eliezer Bergman, Manchester UK
Dear Meir,
Also according to Rebbi Akiva there is estimation for damages! Only he doesn't need Beis Din and it is enough that the witnesses testify that the object can cause damage (Ra'avad and Yam Shel Shlomo). The Gemara quotes Shimon ha'Teimani since he is first to mention the estimation.
All the best,
Reuven Weiner