he emancipated him during his health, he would all be free, and it would not depend on the authorization of the heirs. However, if they both confess that he emancipated one of them during his illness, it does not escape from four states: Either they specify the emancipation in one of them, then two-thirds of him is emancipated; because that is one-third of his entire wealth, unless they authorize the emancipation of all of him, then it is emancipated. Second: That each one of them specifies the emancipation in one other than the one his brother specified, then one-third of each of them (3) is emancipated; because the right of each of them is half of the two slaves, so his word is accepted regarding the emancipation of his right from the one he specified, which is two-thirds of the half that belongs to him, and that is one-third. And because he confesses the freedom of two-thirds of him, so his word is accepted regarding his right from them, which is one-third, and the state of bondage remains in his third; so he has his half, which is the sixth, and half of the slave whose emancipation he denies. The third state: That one of them says: "My father emancipated this one." And the other says: "My father emancipated one of them, I do not know which of them." This is the issue of the book. The drawing of lots takes the place of specifying the one who was not specified; if it falls on the one his brother specified, two-thirds of him is emancipated, as if they had specified him by their words. And if it falls on the other, it is (4) as if each of them had specified a slave; each of them will have one-sixth of the slave he specified, and half of the slave whose emancipation he denies, and one-third of each of the two slaves becomes free. The fourth state: That they both say: "He emancipated one of them, and we do not know which of them." Then lots shall be drawn between the two slaves; whoever the lots fall upon, two-thirds of him is emancipated, if they do not authorize the emancipation of all of him, and the other remains a slave.

Section: If the son who was ignorant of the identity of the emancipated person (5) returns and says: "I have come to know him," before the drawing of lots, then it is as if he had specified him from the beginning without ignorance. If it is after the drawing of lots, and his specification agrees with it, the ruling does not change. If it contradicts it, one-third of the one he specified is emancipated by his specification; if he specifies the one his brother specified, two-thirds of him is emancipated, and if he specifies the other, one-third of him is emancipated. And does the emancipation of the one who was emancipated by the drawing of lots become void? There are two viewpoints.

1954 - Issue: He said: (And when a man has half of a slave, and another has a third of him, and another has a sixth of him, and the owner of the half and the owner of the sixth emancipate together, and they are both wealthy, it is emancipated