extends only to specific assets; it does not extend to personal liability.

His statement, “or acknowledges a debt,” means that while under restriction he acknowledges a debt. That is, this man owes ten thousand and possesses eight thousand, so we place him under restriction. Then, after the restriction has been imposed, he says: “I owe so-and-so four thousand.” We do not accept this acknowledgement with respect to the existing property, but we accept it as binding upon his personal liability. Thus, we say: “It is now established that you owe the person in whose favour you acknowledged the debt four thousand.” However, the four thousand may not be taken from the property, for two reasons:

First, this disposition took place after the restriction was imposed, and a disposition made after restriction cannot be valid insofar as it relates to property.

Second, this debtor may perhaps collude with someone, saying: “I shall acknowledge that I owe you fifty thousand riyals so that you may share with the creditors.” Then, once the money has been distributed and the person in whose favour the acknowledgement was made has received his share, he returns it to the person under restriction.

His statement, “or an offence entailing retaliation,” means that he acknowledges an offence entailing retaliation. Thus, he says that his slave severed someone’s hand at the wrist joint, or he acknowledges that he himself severed someone’s hand at the wrist joint, and the victim chooses financial compensation.

The words, “entailing retaliation,” include the case in which he acknowledges against himself an offence that entails retaliation; such an acknowledgement is valid. However, financial compensation may not be claimed from him until the restriction is lifted.

An offence entailing retaliation is, for example, when he acknowledges that he deliberately severed someone’s hand at the wrist joint. This is an offence entailing retaliation—that is, legal retribution. We therefore say: the acknowledgement is valid; but if the person in whose favour the acknowledgement was made chooses financial compensation, he does not share alongside the creditors;