Permissible or Not to Fix the Wage for Cupping

Some circles refuse to fix the wage for cupping. When asked, "How much is the fee for cupping?" Some answer, "Whatever you sincerely feel like giving" or "We don't want to fix the price. Any amount is fine." Yet, from a fiqh(jurisprudence) perspective, a "sincerely given" contract (akad seikhlasnya) can lead to gharar (uncertainty), and this is forbidden if applied to commercial contracts or contracts that require reciprocity (mu'awadhat), such as selling goods or selling services, where cupping is a service whose contract takes the form of a wage. This is because it is rare for a cupping therapist to willingly or sincerely agree to not be paid by a client if asked to perform cupping or to travel to a home to perform it. When asked why they refuse to fix the wage for cupping, they argue and cite several famous Hadiths, although their understanding of these Hadiths needs to be reviewed. Among them:

“The worst of earnings are the dowry of a prostitute, the price of a dog, and the earnings of a cupper.” (HR. Muslim: 1568 from Rafi’ bin Khadij) Abu Mas'ud Uqbah bin Amr said,

“The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) forbade the earnings of a cupper.” (HR. Ibn Majah: 2165). The same wording is also narrated by An-Nasai: 4673 from Abu Hurayrah. Aun bin Abi Juhaifah said, "I saw my father buy a slave who was skilled at cupping. I asked him about it. He (Abu Juhaifah) replied,

“The Prophet (PBUH) forbade the price of a dog and the price of blood. He also forbade the tattoo artist and the one who asks for a tattoo, the eater of riba (interest) and the one who transacts with riba, and cursed the artist who draws living beings.” (HR. Al-Bukhari: 2086)

The Consensus of the Scholars

A textual evidence (nash) and proof (dalil) cannot be understood partially or literally only without considering other aspects. Especially if it is done by people who lack basic knowledge in interacting with the evidence. When some people only look at the evidence without referencing and knowing the methodology of the scholars in drawing legal conclusions from that evidence, then it is not surprising if those people have odd and strange opinions, and often unknowingly contravene the views that have been agreed upon by the scholars. How excellent is the saying of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal as narrated by Al-Maymuni,

“Ahmad bin Hanbal said to me, ‘O Abul Hasan, beware of discussing (giving an opinion on) an issue for which you have no Imam (precedent/scholarly guide) in it.’” (Narrated by Ibnul Jawzi in Manaqib Al-Imam Ahmad, 1/245) So how did the scholars address this issue of cupping wages? The scholars agree on the permissibility (halal) of the earnings from the cupping profession. It is the same whether the wage is fixed and priced or not. This shows that the scholars did not understand the Hadiths whose literal meaning suggests a prohibition above as an absolute prohibition (tahrim). Ibn Abdil Barr Al-Maliki said when commenting on the Hadith explaining that the earnings from cupping are bad earnings,

“This Hadith is not free from the possibility that the ruling regarding the earnings of cuppers has been abrogated (mansukh) due to the Hadith of Anas and Ibn Abbas and the consensus (ijma’) on that.” (At-Tamhid, 2/227) Ibn Qudamah Al-Hanbali said, refuting those who prohibit cupping wages,

“The fact that the Prophet gave a wage to the cupper is evidence of its permissibility (ibahah), as the Prophet would not give him something that is forbidden for him, yet he – peace be upon him – teaches people and forbids them from prohibited matters, so how could he give them something prohibited and allow them to benefit from it? His command to the cupper to feed his family from those earnings is evidence of permissibility. Thus, his prohibition against consuming those earnings must be understood as relating to dislike (karahah) and not prohibition (tahrim). Likewise is the opinion of Imam Ahmad. His opinion does not deviate from the Prophet’s saying and action, as he intended to follow the Prophet. Similarly, the dislike judged by other Imams, their statements must be understood in this sense (dislike/makruh), and there is no scholar in this issue who holds the opinion of prohibition.” (Al-Mughni, 5/399) Ibn Abdil Barr also quoted the saying of Layth bin Sa’ad,

“Layth bin Sa’ad narrated from Rabi’ah, “Cuppers used to have their own marketplace during the time of Umar bin Al-Khattab.” Layth said, “Yahya bin Said told me, ‘Muslims have continuously affirmed the wage of the cupper and have not rejected it.’”” (At-Tamhid, 11/81) Al-Mudhhiri Al-Hanafi quoted that the four schools of fiqh agreed on the permissibility (halal) of cupping wages. Al-Mudhhiri said commenting on the opinion of the Zhahiri school who prohibits cupping wages,

“The Ahli Zhahir (Zhahiri scholars) said, ‘The cupping wage is forbidden (haram). Because the apparent meaning of the word “khabith” (bad/evil) is forbidden or impure (najis).’ However, none of the four Imams (of the schools of fiqh) agree with that opinion.” (Al-Mafatih fi Syarh Al-Mashabih, 3/391) In addition to the consensus quoted by some scholars, others have quoted that it is the opinion of the majority of scholars (jumhur). An-Nawawi Ash-Shafi’i said,

“The scholars differed regarding the earnings of the cupper. Most scholars from the Salaf and the Khalaf (early and later generations) said that the earnings of the cupper are not forbidden, and consuming them is not forbidden. Whether the person doing it is a free person or a slave, and this is the famous opinion of the Ahmad (Hanbali) school.” (Syarh Sahih Muslim, 10/233)

Evidence for its Permissibility

The lawfulness (halal) of cupping wages is also based on authentic evidence. Most of it comes from the action of the Prophet, besides the existence of the exclusive benefit obtained from the act of cupping and its virtues. Among them is the saying of Abdullah bin Abbas,

“The Prophet (PBUH) had cupping done, and he gave a wage to the one who performed cupping for him. If the wage had been forbidden, he would not have given it to him.” (HR. Al-Bukhari: 2103) Anas bin Malik was asked about the cupper's wage, and Anas replied,

“The Messenger of Allah had cupping done. Abu Taybah cupped him, and he gave him two sa’ of food, and he spoke to his master so they reduced his obligation.” (HR. Al-Bukhari: 5696) Ibn Muhayyisah narrated concerning his father (Muhayyisah),

“His father once asked the Messenger of Allah for permission regarding taking a wage for cupping. He forbade him from it. His father continued to ask and seek permission until the Messenger of Allah commanded him, “Use that wage to feed your mount and your family!”” (HR. Abu Dawud: 3422, At-Tirmidhi: 1277, and Ibn Majah: 2166) These Hadiths are evidence for the lawfulness (halal) of cupping wages. Because, if the cupping wage were forbidden, the Messenger of Allah would not have given a wage to the one who cupped him. The Messenger of Allah would also not have permitted a cupper to provide for his family from those cupping earnings. As for the previous Hadiths that contain criticism and prohibition against consuming the earnings from the cupping profession, there are two possibilities: either the ruling in those Hadiths has been abrogated (mansukh) and Muslims have agreed not to practice them anymore, or the prohibition is not understood as a haram prohibition, but merely a moral prohibition (tanzih). This is what led some scholars to dislike (makruh) the earnings from cupping even though they consider them lawful.

Note 

It is not denied that there are a few scholars who prohibit cupping wages, meaning the service contract for cupping is forbidden or that setting a price for the cupping wage is forbidden. Naturally, this opinion contradicts the consensus of the four schools of fiqh adopted by the majority of Muslims today. This opinion is held by the Zhahiri school. Ibn Hazm Al-Andalusi Adh-Dhahiri said,

“It is not permissible to make a service contract (ijarah) for cupping. But the cupper should be given (money) as a token of goodwill (tayyib an-nafs) and he is allowed to ask for it, if the cupper agrees. If he does not agree, then his work should be appraised after it is completed perfectly, not before that.” (Al-Muhalla bi Al-Athar, 7/16) This view of Ibn Hazm is followed by a small number of adherents of the Hanbali school like Al-Hulwani Al-Hanbali as quoted by Ibn Muflih.[1] Some Hanbalis also quoted that this is one of the opinions of Ahmad bin Hanbal, but that quotation has been refuted and rebutted by Ibn Qudamah Al-Hanbali as mentioned above.[2]

Conclusion

The correct and authentic view is the absolute lawfulness (halal) of cupping wages. The scholars have agreed on this. It is the same whether the wage is priced, fixed, open to service price negotiation, or not. The opinion that prohibits it is an odd (ghanjil) opinion, it contradicts the agreement of the scholars of the schools of fiqh, is not practiced, and also can "oppress" the cuppers because they do not know the price they should receive for their service, despite having spent time, energy, and other operational costs to cup their patients.

Wallahu a’lam bish shawab (And Allah knows best what is correct).