The first view:
The person being cupped breaks his fast, but the cupper does not. Al-Khiraqī mentioned this view. However, the explicitly stated position of Ahmad and the majority of his followers is that both procedures break the fast. The text indicates this, so there is no justification for setting it aside.

The second view:
The person who undergoes cupping and has blood drawn breaks his fast, but undergoing venesection or similar procedures does not break it, because these are not called cupping. This is the view of al-Qādī and his followers. Later scholars disagreed over whether scarification of the ears falls within the meaning of cupping.

Some say that scarification is equivalent to cupping. This is the view of our shaykh Abū Muhammad al-Maqdisī, and the statements of the scholars universally indicate it. None of them discusses scarification separately. Had they considered it outside the scope of cupping, they would have mentioned it separately, as they did venesection. It is therefore evident that they regarded scarification as a form of cupping. Our shaykh Abū Muhammad said, “This is the correct view.”

Further on, he said:

The fourth view—which is the correct one, adopted by Abū al-Muzaffar ibn Hubayrah, the learned and just vizier, and others—is that cupping, venesection, and similar procedures break the fast. This is because the relevant feature of cupping is also present in venesection, from both a legal and a physiological standpoint. Whenever the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) encouraged and prescribed cupping, this also constituted encouragement of equivalent procedures, such as venesection and others. In hot regions, however, the heat draws the body’s blood