(1) Tabaqat al-Sufiyya, pp. 212/216; Hilyat al-Awliyaʾ, vol. 10, pp. 232–233; al-Risālah al-Qushayrīyah, p. 21; al-Muntazam, vol. 6, pp. 239–240; Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ, vol. 14, pp. 523–526. (2) In Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ (vol. 14, pp. 225–226), al-Dhahabī alone—citing al-Sulamī and Ibn Manda—reports his death in 317 AH, refuting those who erroneously gave the year as 19 AH. The reading in the printed edition of Tabaqat al-Sufiyya agrees with our sources, as do all other biographical records. (3) Tabaqat al-Sufiyya, pp. 299–301; al-Muntazam, vol. 6, p. 240; Tabaqat al-Shaʿrānī, vol. 1, pp. 134–135—where his name appears mistakenly as Abu al-Ḥasan Muḥammad ibn Saʿīd. (4) al-Muntazam, vol. 6, p. 240. (5) Manuscripts (b) and (ḍāʾ) alone include this entry, which departs from Ibn Kathīr’s usual style of presenting biographies and from his doctrinal orientation. Ibn Masarra al-Maghribī Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn Masarra, Abū ʿAbd Allāh, a mawla of Quraysh and one of the foremost figures of his time and milieu. He composed numerous works on principles (usūl), legal branches (furūʿ), and Sufism, and excelled in Qurʾānic exegesis, ḥadīth, the study of the heart and ethical conduct. Ibn ʿAbd al-Rawwūf—one of the princes of al-Andalus—praised him in his Tabaqāt, recounting marvels and observing: “In brief, he was the scholar of the age, the jurist of his time, the wonder of creation, the spiritual guide of the ummah, the beacon of guidance, the cave of piety, the ocean of knowledge, the mine of forbearance, the luminous lamp, the sublime mount; one who made the Qurʾān his safeguard, the sunnah his qiblah, the Hereafter his aim, and asceticism his provision.” He was well versed in reports and transmission of traditions, a great philosopher, a wise physician, a logician and dialectician, an astronomer-astrologer, a peerless poet, and a consummate orator. He then expounds in detail, noting that ignorant individuals in our Egypt and era have attacked him, attributing to him what they do not know, until he states: “His constant companion was the collective consensus (ijmāʿ).” He is also mentioned by Muḥammad ibn al-Hārith ibn Asad al-Qayrawānī, the jurist and member of the council (shūrā) in Córdoba, in his Tārīkh al-Andalus, where he writes: “Opinion of him is divided into two camps: one that regards him as attaining the rank of an imām in both knowledge and asceticism, due to his excellence in learning and sincerity in asceticism; and another camp….”