Is a loan invalid if the borrower stipulates that they will pledge a slave for double the amount borrowed (the original loan plus the amount already owed)?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Pledges (Collateral)
Primary text
The loan contract is void based on the narration from Hanbal quoting Ahmad ibn Hanbal, which aligns with the view of Al-Shafi'i. This is because the loan results in a benefit (Manfa'ah) to the lender, which is securing the repayment of the first thousand. If the loan is void, the pledge associated with it is also void. The distinction is that if one stipulates the lender will receive a pledge for the newly loaned amount, that is permissible because it only secures the repayment of the new loan amount. In the current case, the stipulation secures a debt predating the loan, thus securing a non-mandated liability through the loan.
Supporting text
It is narrated by Mihna that the loan is valid. It is suggested that Ahmad may have ruled the loan valid while the stipulation was void, to avoid the consequence of a loan generating an impermissible benefit, or he ruled only the pledge concerning the first thousand void while validating the rest. If the transaction were a sale instead of a loan, and one stipulated to sell a slave for one thousand plus a pledge securing the existing first thousand debt, the sale is void in all narrations because the price is indeterminate; the price includes one thousand cash and an unknown benefit represented by the security on the prior debt.