(1) The critic in question is Ibn Rushayd, in his now-lost work Tarjuman al-Tarajim; see al-Yawaqit wa al-Durar by al-Manawi, 1:162, and Qada al-Watar by al-Laqani, p. 579. (2) Manuscript A reads “min.” (3) Manuscript J adds “bihi,” manuscript Y adds “anhu,” and manuscript K has “ʿAlqamah” in the nominative; the edited text follows J. (4) Manuscripts H, T, and K vocalize “tafarrada” with fatḥa on both the ra and the dal; the preferred reading follows B, W, Ḥ, and M. Manuscript T also adds “bihi.” (5) Manuscript L, and a copy noted in the margin of H, add “al-Taymi.” (6) The word “bihi” is absent from manuscript T. (7) Manuscript H again vocalizes “tafarrada” with fatḥa on the ra and the dal. (8) Manuscript A reads “al-muhaqqiqin.” (9) Manuscript Y reads “yaʿtad.” (10) Manuscript A has “yaslim” (with kasra on the lam); D and M read “yusallam” (passive, with ḍamma on the ya and a doubled lam); Z and H read “nusallim.” The adopted wording follows J, Ḥ, and W. (11) Manuscript B writes the name as “Rashid” (fatḥa on the ra); the reading adopted from J, D, Ḥ, and W is correct. Manuscripts Z, T, L, and M give “Rushd,” which is mistaken. Ibn Rushayd is Abu ʿAbd Allah Muhammad b. ʿUmar b. Muhammad b. Rushayd al-Fihri al-Sibti (d. 721 AH); see Aʿyan al-ʿAsr by al-Safadi, 4:676, and al-Ihata by Ibn al-Khatib, 3:102. (12) Manuscript D puts “awwal” in the genitive; the adopted nominative reading follows J, Ḥ, Z, Y, K, and M. Al-Qari notes in Sharh Sharh al-Nukhbah, p. 205, that the word is nominative because it is the subject of “yakfi.” (13) Ibn Rushayd’s remark occurs in his lost Tarjuman al-Tarajim; see al-Nukat al-Wafiyyah by al-Biqai, 1:83, and al-Yawaqit wa al-Durar by al-Manawi, 1:286.