What is the ruling when an acknowledgment entails a claim against another party?

Primary text

An acknowledgment that implies a claim against another party is accepted concerning the obligation resting upon the recognizer, but not concerning the claim that benefits the recognizer. This is analogous to a husband stating to his wife, 'I have divorced you in exchange for one thousand,' where the divorce takes effect based on his acknowledgment, but his statement regarding the compensation (aiwad) is not accepted, and the wife's denial of compensation is upheld. Similarly, if a master states to his slave, 'I have sold your freedom to you for one thousand,' the same principle applies.