What is the ruling if an agent manumits half the slave without specifying whose share is intended?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Manumission
Primary text
If the agent manumits half the slave without specifying any intention, one possibility is that it is directed towards the agent's own share because the manumission of the agent's share does not require specific intention, whereas the manumission of the partner's share requires intention, which was not stated. Another possibility is that it is directed towards the partner's share because the agent was ordered to manumit, so it applies to what he was commanded to do. A third possibility is that it applies to both shares because they are equally subject to the action. In whichever case the manumission is ruled to have occurred, the agent must compensate for the partner's share.
Supporting text
It is also possible that the agent is not liable for compensation. If the agent manumits his own share, and it extends by extension to the partner's share, the agent is not liable because he was authorized for the manumission and the extension occurred as a consequence of that authorized act, similar to one authorized to destroy something who is not liable if destruction occurs through extension.