A CRITICAL MIND 133
accomplished in theory but not yet confi dent in practice. The closer ex-
amination that allows us to correct the prevalent mistake in the interpre-
tation of this passage, however, offers an insight into Maimonides’s
medical method. In all likelihood, a statement that would describe Mai-
monides as lacking in daring would not have offended him. He would
probably have read it as a faithful description of his approach to the
practice of medicine. In Maimonides’ view, daring for the physician can
be tantamount to playing with his patient’s life; it is the kind of conceited
overconfi dence that in metaphysical contexts he calls tahafut.^40
The reading of Ibn al- Qifti as offering a poor evaluation of Maimonides’
medical daring led to a negative ad sensum rendering of his other state-
ment, regarding Maimonides’ skill. If, however, we assume the tenor of
Ibn al- Qifti’s entry on Maimonides to be factual rather than derogatory,
then the translation of this second passage, too, must be corrected ac-
cordingly. Maimonides believed that the collaboration of several physi-
cians, who can discuss the case and agree on a treatment, is in the best
interest of the patient. Ibn al- Qifti probably refers to this practice, and
the gist of the problematic sentence in his text must be: “He used to work
with other physicians. He would not rely on his opinion alone, but rather
on jointly achieved [opinion]^41 achieved by agreement (wafqan), both in
treatment and when assigning a regimen.” Maimonides’ minimalist, cau-
tious approach in the practice of medicine is closely tied to his view of
the nature of this profession. There can be no doubt that he took his
profession very seriously, and sought to master its secrets as much as he
could. In his correspondence, he describes his extreme fatigue after a
long day at the palace or in the hospital. He also describes his tenacity in
perfecting his knowledge in this domain, reading medical literature into
the night, despite his exhaustion, “for you know how long this art is and
how diffi cult it is for the punctual and conscientious [doctor] who does
not want to say anything without fi rst knowing its proof.”^42 For Maimo-
nides, who follows here Farabi, medicine is an art (sinaa), and his words
here allude to Hippocrates’ fi rst Aphorism. In his commentary on this
aphorism Maimonides states that, because of the complexity of the medi-
cal art, its study is more time- consuming than the study of other arts. He
then says: “Abu Nasr al- Farabi has mentioned that the parts, the knowl-
edge of which constitutes the art of medicine, are seven in number.”^43
(^40) See chap. 2, above, apud note 75.
(^41) An examination of the manuscripts may offer a correct reading of the text, or a proper
emendation. Perhaps lakinna musharakatan?
(^42) Epistles, 313.
(^43) See M. Plessner, “Al- Farabi’s Introduction to the Study of Medicine,” in S. M. Stern et al.,
eds.,Islamic Philosophy and the Classical Tradition: Essays Presented by His Friends and