Imam ash-Shirazi in the Muhadzab said:
The hijama (cupping) is permissible for the one fasting due to the narration of Ibnu Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, that the Prophet, Allah’s Salutations and Peace upon him,” did hijama while he is fasting.” Imam ash-Shafii said in al-Umm: It is more beloved to me that one leaves it, because of a narration of ‘AbdurRahman bin Abi Laila who heard from the companions of the Prophet, Allah’s Peace and Salutations upon him, that they said: the Prophet, Allah’s Peace and Salutations upon him, has surely prohibited using the hijama and al-wiśol (continuous fasting) for the fasting person out of ibqa’ of his companions.
Imam an-Nawawi in his commentary of the above mentioned:
The Hadith of Ibnu Abbas is narrated by al-Bukhari in his śoheeh. On the other hand, the Hadith of ‘AbdurRahman bin Abi Laila is narrated by Abu Daud with a sound chain upon the criteria of both al-Bukhari and Muslim. However, in the narrations of Abu Daud, al-Baihaqi and others, from ‘AbdurRahman bin Abi Laila: He said, “A man from the companions of the Prophet, Allah’s Salutations and Peace be upon him, narrated to me …..” and this phrasing differs from what is mentioned in al-Muhaźźab. Ibqa’ here means gentleness towards them.
As for the ruling of this issue, ash-Shafii and the ashab are of the opinion that hijama is permissible for the one fasting and does not result in him nullifying his fast. However, it is awlaa (best) to avoid it. This is what is stipulated by ash-Shafii and concluded by the jumhur (majority). A group from our ashab, who are excellent in both Fiqh and Hadith, are of the opinion that hijama nullifies the fast. Amongst them are Abu Bakr ibn Munzhir, Abu Bakr bin Khuzaima, Abu al-Walid an-Naisaburi and al-Hakim Abu Abdillah due to a Hadith that we will mention later. Our ashab said the ruling of al-faśdu is the same as al-hijama.
The Mazhabs of the Scholars
We have mentioned earlier that in our mazhab, the hijama does not nullify the fast, neither for the hājim (the one who cups) nor the mahjūm (the one being cupped). This is the opinion of ibn Mas’uud, ibn Umar, ibn Abbas, Anas bin Malik, abu Sa’eed al-Khudri, Ummu Salama, Sa’eed bin al-Musayyib, ‘Urwa, ibn Zubair, ash-Sha’bi, an-Naja’ie, Malik, ath-Thawri, abu Hanifa, Daud and others. The author of al-Hawi said
This is the opinion of the majority of the Companions and most of the jurists (fuqaha’)
A group of the scholars are of the opinion that hijama nullifies the fast. This is the opinion of ‘Ali bin Abi Tolib, Abu Huraira, Aisha, al-Hasan al-Basri, Ibnu Sirīn, ‘Atha’, al-‘Auza’ie, Ahmad, Ishaq, Ibnu al-Munzhir and Ibnu al-Khuzaima. al-Khattabi said:
Ahmad and Ishaq are of the opinion that the fasts of both the hājim and the mahjūm are nullified. It is obligatory for both to qadha’ (make up for) the fast without kaffara (atonement). On the other hand, ‘Atha’ is of the opinion that it is obligatory for the one who uses hijama to qadha’ with kaffara.
All of them made hujja with the (1) hadīth of Thawban who said: “I heard the Prophet, Allah’s Salutations and Peace be upon him said, the hajim and mahjum broke their fasts” narrated by Abu Daud, an-Nasaie and Ibnu Majah with sound chains. The isnad of Abu Daud is upon the criteria of Muslim. The second evidence is the (2) hadith of Shaddad bin Aws who said: “The Prophet, Allah’s Salutations and Peace upon him, came to a man in Baqī’ after 18 days of Ramadhan had passed while the man is using hijama. The Prophet was holding my hand when he said: the hājim and mahjūm nullified their fasts.” Abu Daud, an-Nasaie and Ibn Majah narrated this with sound chains. The third is the (3) hadīth of Rafi’ Bin Khadīj who heard the Prophet, Allah’s Salutations and Peace upon him, said ” The hajim and mahjum nullified their fasts”. This is narrated by at-Tirmidhi who said the Hadith is hasan. (4) Abu Huraira, as well as (5) Abu Musa also narrated from the Prophet, Allah’s Salutations and Peace upon him, similar hadīths. They were narrated by al-Hakim in the Mustadrak who said that it is sound. Al-Hakim then narrated from Ali bin al-Madini who said that it is sound.
Al-Hakim Abu Abdillah in the Mustadrak narrated from Ahmad bin Hanbal who said the most sound of what is narrated in this matter is the Hadith of Thawban. On the other hand, Ali bin al-Madini said he does not know with regard to it a Hadith more sound than the Hadith of Rafi’ bin Khadeej. Al-Hakim mentions that Ahmad had assessed for one of these two hadīths to be sound, and the other to be sound as well. Ishaq bin Rahwaih assessed the hadīth of Shaddad bin Aws to be sound. Al-Hakim then narrated with his chain from Ishaq in which he mentions that with regard to the Hadith of Shaddad: “This chain is sound, with which making hujjah may be established.” Ishaq said: “This hadīth is indeed sound with its chains, and therefore I speak with it.” Al-Hakim said: “May Allah’s Pleasure be upon Ishaq. He had indeed, in a manifest manner assessed the authenticity of the hadīth which he speaks with.” Al-Hakim then concluded that in this matter, the above hadiths “are indeed hadīths from a group of the companions with sound chains as per its lengthy commentaries.” He then narrated with his chain from al-Imam al-Hafizh Uthman bin Sa’eed ad-Darimi who said:
In my view, the Hadith the hājim and mahjūm nullified the fast is sound from the narrations of Shaddad bin Aws and Thawban.
Uthman said ” I speak with it.” He said: ” I heard Ahmad Bin Hanbal spoke with it as well wherein he said that in his view the hadīths of Thawban and Shaddad are sound.” Al-Baihaqi also narrated the Hadith ” the hajīm and the mahjūm nullified the fast” from the narration of Usama bin Zaid, from the Prophet, Allah’s Salutation and Peace upon him, and from the marfū’ narration of Atha’ from Ibn Abbas, and from the mursal narration of Atha’ from the Prophet, Allah’s Salutations and Peace upon him. He said: “this mursal narration of ‘Atha’ is mahfuzh (sound) while the mentioning of Ibn Abbas, there is wahm (doubt) with regard to it. On the other hand, the marfū’ narration of ‘Aisha is with a weak chain. Al-Baihaqi mentions that al-Hafizh Abu Zur’ah said “The marfu’ narration of Atha’ from Abi Huraira with regard to this hadith is hasan”. In the Muwattha’, Nafi’ is quoted to have said ” Ibnu Umar indeed used hijama while he is fasting and then left it. He henceforth does not use hijama when he fasted until he broke his fast.”
Our ashab made hujja with the (1) Hadith of Ibnu Abbas: that the Prophet, Allah’s Salutations and Peace upon him, used hijama while he is in ihram, and he used hijama while he is fasting. This is narrated by al-Bukhari in his śoheeh. Secondly, (2) Thabit al-Bunani was also narrated to have said: “Anas was asked “Do you all prohibit the use of hijama for a fasting person?” He replied ” No, except on account of weakness.” as narrated by al-Bukhari. In another narration from him, he said “base on the instruction of the Prophet, Allah’s Salutation and Peace upon him”. Third, is the evidence from (3) abdu ar-Rahman bin Abu Laila who said ” A man from the companions of the Prophet, Allah’s Salutations and Peace upon him, said to me: “that the Prophet, Allah’s Salutation and Peace upon him, prohibited using hijama and al-muwasola. And he did not prohibit these two except for ibqa’ for his companions.” Abu Daud narrated this with a chain complying with the requirements of al-Bukhari and Muslim as mentioned earlier. Abu Daud, al-Baihaqi and others made hujja with it, in that using hijama does not nullify the fast. Fourth is the evidence from (4) abi Sa’eed al-Khudri who said “The Prophet, Salutations of Allah and His Peace upon him, gave rukhsa (permission) for the fasting person to kiss and to use hijama”. This is narrated by ad-Daruqutni who said that its chain consists of thiqat narrators in its entirety. He then narrated it from another chain in which he said, all the narrators are thiqat. Fith is the evidence from (5) Anas who said: “The beginning of the prohibition with regard to using hijama for the fasting person is when Ja’far bin Abu Tholib was using hijama while he was fasting when the Prophet, Salutations of Allah and His Peace, passed by him. He then said: These two nullified the fast. The Prophet, Salutations of Allah and His Peace upon him after that gave rukhsa to use hijama for the fasting person. Anas used to do hijama while he was fasting.” This is narrated by ad-Daruqutni who said all the narrators are thiqat. He said: I do not know to it any ‘illa (faults). Sixth is the evidence from (6)‘Aisha who said “The Prophet, Salutations of Allah and His Peace, used hijama while he was fasting.” Al-Baihaqi said: There are narrations from (7) Sa’d bin Waqas, (8) Ibnu Mas’uud, (9) Ibn Abbas, (10) Ibnu Umar, (11) al-Husain bin ‘Ali, (12) Zaid bin Arqam, (13) Aisha, and (14) Ummu Salama, may Allah’s Pleasure be upon them all, with regard to the rukhsa. The ashab also used evidences from other hadīths but there are weaknesses in some of them. The relied upon evidence is as what we mentioned earlier. They also made use of qiyas with regard to al-fasdu and ar-Ru’aaf (nosebleeding).
As for the Hadith “The hājim and the mahjūm broke their fast.” , our ashab responded to it with several counter arguments.
- One of them is the response of ash-Shafii himself who mentioned it in al-Umm, but there is ikhtilaf with regard to it. Al-Khottabi and the rest of our ashab however proceeded upon it. It is mentioned that the prohibition is mansūkh (abrogated) with the Hadith of Ibnu Abbas and others from what we mentioned earlier. The evidence of its abrogation is from ash-Shafii and al-Baihaqi who narrated from Shaddad bin Aws with both of its chains sound who said: “We were with the Prophet, Allah’s Salutation and Peace upon him, during the time of the fath (conquest of Makkah) and he saw a man using hijama after 18 days of Ramadhan passed while he was holding my hand. The hājim and the mahjūm nullified their fast.” And it was previously established in the soheeh of al-Bukhari with regard to the Hadith of Ibnu Abbas “that the Prophet, Salutations of Allah and His Peace upon him, used hijama while he is in ihram and fasting.” Ash-Shafi’i said: Ibn Abbas accompanied the Prophet, Allah’s Salutations and His Peace upon him, in a state of ihram during the hujjatul wada’ (final pilgrimage of the Prophet, Allah’s Peace and Salutations upon him) in the 10th hijri year and he did not accompany him in a state of ihram before that. The fath, however was in the eighth year without doubt. Therefore the Hadith of Ibnu Abbas is after the Hadith of Shaddad by more than two years. He said therefore the Hadith of Ibnu Abbas abrogates the other Hadith. Al-Baihaqi said: His saying in the aforementioned Hadith of Anas with regard to the narration of Ja’far: “Then the Prophet, Allah’s Peace and Salutations upon him, after that made rukhsa with regard to hijama” also indicated its abrogation. And this Hadith is also sound as mentioned earlier. The Hadith of Abi Sa’eed al-Khudri mentioned earlier also indicates the abrogation. The prevailing judgment therefore is that the rukhsa is applied, and not the prohibition.
- The second response is that of ash-Shafii as well that the Hadith of Ibn Abbas is more sound. On top of that, it is also supported by qiyas. Therefore, it is obligatory to give precedence to it.
- The third response is that of ash-Shafii, al-Khottabi, and our ashab that the intended meaning with regard to the nullification of the fast of the hājim and the mahjūm is that they both caused a defect in their fasts. al-Baihaqi narrated that in some of his narrations of Thawban. Ash-Shafii said: “Upon this interpretation, the intended meaning of “nullifying their fast” is “the detriment to the reward of their fasts” as per the saying of the Companions to one who speaks during khutba ” No Jum’a for you.” to mean “There is no reward for you, when otherwise the Jum’a would have been undamaged and you would have been rewarded for it.”
- The fourth response is that of al-Khottabi who is of the opinion that the meaning is “it causes one to be susceptible to nullify the fast”. The mahjūm, due to the weakness incurred upon him by the removal of his blood, may be afflicted by difficulty and therefore unable to fast. As a result, he breaks his fast due to it. As for the hājim, something, such as the blood etc, may reach his jauf (interior of his body) when he constantly brings together his two lips on the cane (traditionally used for cupping). This is analogous to calling someone who exposes himself to destruction: “So and so is destroyed!”, even though he is alive and well. And as per his saying, Allah’s Salutation and Peace be upon him, ” One who is made a qadhi has already been slaughtered without a knife”, meaning he exposes himself to getting slaughtered without a knife.
- The fifth response is by al-Khottabi as well in which he mentions that the Prophet, Allah’s salutation and Peace be upon him, passed by them when it was very close to Maghrib and thus he said ” They broke their fast” which means “It is time for their breaking of fast.” This is similar to saying, “The man entered the evening.” when the evening time entered or when it is near to evening time.
- The sixth response is that he here, considered it difficult for them and the above is a form of calling upon them against doing so. This is because they committed something, which made themselves susceptible to damaging their fasts.
Know that abu Bakr bin Khuzaima did not agree with the use of the Hadith of Ibnu Abbas as evidence. Al-Hakim abu ‘Abdillah narrated from him in the Mustadrak that he said:
“the Hadīths from the Prophet, Allah’s Salutations and Peace upon him, in which he said “the hājim and mahjūm invalidated their fasts” are established (thabit). Some of those who disagreed with us in this matter said: “One says: Hijama does not invalidate the fast due to the Hadìth of Ibn Abbas that the Prophet, Allah’s Salutation and Peace be upon him, used hijama while he is in ihram and fasting.” This is not a valid hujja even though the Prophet, Allah’s Salutation and Peace be upon him did hijama whilst he is in ihram, fasting and travelling. This is because he is not merely in ihram, as a resident in his city. In fact he is travelling, and for a traveller, even though he intends to complete his fast, he could break his fast at any point by eating, drink, doing hijama or others. It is therefore not necessary that the Prophet, Allah’s Salutations and Peace Upon him, did hijama but his fast is not invalidated. Therefore, he did hijama, and consequently he broke his fast, while this is permissible.
This is the quote of ibn Khuzaima as narrated by al-Khottabi in the Ma’ālim as-Sunan. He then said that this interpretation is bātil (invalid) because Ibn Abbas said, “He did hijama whilst he is fasting”, and therefore his fast still remains valid with his hijama. If his fast is invalidated he would surely have said, “He invalidated his fast with the hijama”. This is similar to saying “He broke his fast with bread.” instead of “He ate it while he is fasting”. I say, al-Khattabi’s statement shows the aforementioned correct understanding of the ashab to the saying of ibn abbas “he did hijama while he is fasting” as it indicates that hijama doesn’t nullify the fast. Furthermore, the rest of the hadiths affirms this.