حاشية على غاية المرام فيما يتعلق بأنكحة الأنام لأبي العباس أحمد بن عمر ال يربي الغنيمي (ت: 1151ه)

The purpose of this dissertation is to investigate the book of Abi al-Abbas Ahmed bin Omar al-Dairabi al-Ghunaimi (d. 1151 AH) on Shafi'i jurisprudence, called "Hashiya ala Ghayat al-Maram fi ma yataallak bi ankihatu al-anam" It is a book in the chapter on marriage, which is the third section in the divisions of jurisprudence in the Shafi'i books.The book is considered one of the most important sources of Shafi'i jurisprudence due to the large number of quotes and inferences in it. It is also a jurisprudential reference that reflects the jurisprudential situation in the eleventh and twelfth centuries AH. The study relied on two copies of the manuscript from the Al-Azhar Library in Egypt. In its investigation, it followed the historical descriptive approach when presenting the author's personal and scientific biography, the analytical approach when following the author's approach, and the critical approach when examining the author's lack or neglect in his book. The study concluded the following: The book is distinguished by its expansion of issues and details of permissible and forbidden marriages, and its unique division and arrangement on the chapters of jurisprudence. The author has been quoted from the most important books of Shafi'i jurisprudence covering a wide period of time, which indicates the comprehensiveness and diversity of his sources. He also attributed the sayings to their owners, and conveyed the discussions that took place between him and his sheikhs on some emerging modern issues, as for his approach to reasoning, it was based on the evidence of what came in the Qur'an, the Sunnah of the Prophet, may God's prayers and peace be upon him, and consensus. He cared about issues of disagreement in his school of Jurisprudence, and seldom dealt with them in other schools of thought. His book was also distinguished by the rooting of the jurisprudential terminology, the care of jurisprudential and fundamental rules, and the benefit from different sciences. He was interested in presenting similar issues and the differences between them, and he was commenting on it and explaining it, and weighing it. The author was also distinguished by his ability to invent issues, and detail issues that did not occur in his time yet. It is criticized for its details on imaginary issues rather than realistic issues, as well as its lack of expansion in mentioning jurisprudential evidence, but this does not diminish the scientific value of the book.