on the condition that he give him five thousand of it. The acknowledgment is valid, because it was made by one competent to make it; but the settlement is not valid, because it involves unlawfully consuming wealth.

However, the correct view is that this matter requires further detail. If the debtor refused to acknowledge the debt except on this condition, then the settlement is invalid while the acknowledgment stands, and he may be held liable for it in legal judgment. But if he does not object and acknowledges the debt, then waiving part of it falls under the heading of a promise. The correct view is that fulfilling a promise is obligatory, and that it is not permissible for a person to break a promise, since breaking promises is among the traits of the hypocrites—unless there is some harm involved.