When discussing halal and haram food in Islam, the discussion is not limited to animals that live on land. Animals that live in the sea also have their own provisions in fiqh. In general, the ruling on marine animals is indeed broader compared to land animals. However, this does not mean that all marine animals are automatically halal according to every madhhab.

Allah SWT says:

“Lawful to you is game from the sea and its food as provision for you…”
(QS. Al-Ma’idah: 96)

In addition, the Prophet ﷺ said when asked about seawater:

“Its water is pure and its dead are lawful.”
(HR. Abu Dawud, al-Tirmidhi, al-Nasa’i, Ibn Majah, and others)

These proofs form an important basis in the discussion of the ruling on seafood. Even so, the scholars have differing opinions regarding how broad the scope of this ruling is. This difference becomes even more interesting when a marine animal has a form or characteristics resembling a land animal that is haram to consume.

Basic Ruling on Marine Animals

In Islamic fiqh, there are differing opinions regarding animals that live in the sea. The Shafi’i, Maliki, and Hanbali madhhabs generally hold a broad view of marine animals and permit various types of animals that live in water. Meanwhile, the Hanafi madhhab has a more limited provision, namely that basically only fish are included among the marine animals that are halal to consume.

Because of this, animals such as crab, lobster, and octopus can have different rulings depending on which madhhab is followed. In the view of the majority of scholars, these animals are included among the seafood that may be consumed. Meanwhile, in the Hanafi madhhab, marine animals that are not fish are generally not permitted.

Thus, the term “seafood” in everyday life does not always have the same legal scope in fiqh.

Shark: A Predator That Remains Halal

Shark is one interesting example in this discussion. Shark has sharp teeth, preys on other animals, and is known as a sea predator. So, does this trait make it haram?

No. Shark is basically included among fish, so its ruling is halal to consume. The Institute for the Study of Food, Drugs, and Cosmetics (LPPOM) MUI also explains that the hadith about the prohibition of eating fanged predatory animals is understood as pertaining to land animals, while marine animals have specific proofs indicating their permissibility.

This shows that the characteristic of being a “predator” does not always produce the same ruling for land animals and marine animals. The ruling on shark is not determined merely because it has fangs or preys on other animals, but also based on its category as a marine animal.

Even so, the principle of ṭayyib still needs to be considered. If an animal is proven to be harmful to human health, that factor can affect the ruling on its consumption.

Whale: A Sea Mammal That May Be Eaten

Whale provides an interesting example because modern biological classification and fiqh classification do not always use the same categories.

Biologically, whale is a sea mammal, not a fish. However, in fiqh, whale is included among the marine animals that are permitted to be consumed by the majority of scholars. In fact, there is a narration that the companions once ate whale meat that they found during a journey, and the Prophet ﷺ affirmed it.

Therefore, the halal status of whale does not depend on whether whale is biologically classified as “fish” or “mammal”. What matters is the proof and category of marine animals in the discussion of fiqh.

This example shows that terms used in modern biology cannot always simply be equated with categories used in books of fiqh.

What About Octopus, Crab, and Lobster?

For animals such as octopus, crab, and lobster, the difference between madhhabs becomes clearer.

The Shafi’i, Maliki, and Hanbali madhhabs generally permit marine animals, so these animals are halal to consume. Conversely, the Hanafi madhhab generally limits halal marine animals to fish. Because octopus, crab, and lobster are not categorized as fish, they are not permitted according to the common Hanafi opinion.

This difference does not mean that one madhhab disregards the Qur’an or hadith. All madhhabs use the Qur’an and Sunnah as sources of law, but may differ in understanding the scope of a proof, combining various hadith, and determining the category of the animal in question.

Thus, someone who follows a particular madhhab may have different provisions when consuming non-fish seafood. Differences like this are part of ikhtilāf (difference of opinion) in fiqh.

What About Marine Animals That Resemble Haram Animals?

The discussion becomes more interesting when we find marine animals that have a form or name resembling a land animal that is haram.

One example is kalb al-baḥr, which can literally be translated as “sea dog”. In the discussion of fiqh, the issue is not merely whether the animal has a name or form resembling a dog, but how the fuqaha categorize the animal and what proof is used to determine its ruling.

In other words, physical resemblance does not automatically make the ruling on the two animals the same.

This principle is important because the name of an animal in everyday language does not always indicate its legal category. An animal called a “sea dog”, for example, does not automatically receive the same ruling as a land dog just because its name contains the word “dog”.

Scholars instead discuss animals like this based on habitat, characteristics, and the fiqh provisions that apply to marine animals. The discussion regarding marine animals that resemble land animals also shows that classification in fiqh is not always determined by name or physical form alone.

Does the Prohibition on Land Animals Apply the Same Way to Marine Animals?

Not always.

In the discussion of land animals, there are proofs that specifically prohibit certain types of animals, such as pigs and certain predatory animals. One well-known hadith mentions the prohibition of eating every predatory animal with fangs. However, scholars do not simply apply this provision to all marine animals.

LPPOM MUI explains that the hadith about fanged predatory animals is understood in the context of land animals, while marine animals have specific proofs, among them QS. Al-Ma’idah verse 96, which forms the basis for the permissibility of seafood.

Therefore, shark does not become haram merely because it has fangs and is a predator. Likewise, the resemblance of a marine animal to a haram land animal does not automatically transfer the ruling of that land animal to the marine animal.

However, this principle also does not mean that all marine animals are certainly halal according to every madhhab. The difference of opinion regarding octopus, crab, lobster, and other non-fish marine animals shows that classification remains an important part of establishing the ruling.

So, Are All Marine Animals Halal?

The answer depends on the madhhab and the type of animal being discussed.

Simply put, the general picture is as follows:

• Fish: halal.
• Shark: halal because it is included among fish.
• Whale: halal according to the majority of scholars because it is included among the permitted marine animals.
• Octopus, crab, lobster, and other marine animals: generally halal according to the Shafi’i, Maliki, and Hanbali madhhabs, but have different provisions in the Hanafi madhhab.
• Marine animals that resemble haram land animals: do not automatically follow the ruling of that land animal. Classification and characteristics of the animal still need to be considered.

Thus, the question “are all marine animals halal?” cannot be answered simply by looking at whether an animal lives in the sea. In fiqh, the proof used, the classification of the animal, its characteristics, and the madhhab followed can all affect the final ruling.

This difference of opinion is part of ikhtilāf in Islamic fiqh. A difference in ruling on a matter does not always mean there is a contradiction in the sources of religion, but can occur because scholars use different methods and approaches in understanding the proofs.

In the end, the ruling on seafood cannot be determined solely from the name, form, or impression that an animal looks “fierce” or “disgusting”. In the perspective of fiqh, what matters more is how the shariah proofs are applied to the characteristics and category of the animal.

Written by: Naflah

References

Aquil, A., Malihah, N., Rahmawati, E., Nashihin, H., Layalin, N. A., & Ahadi, A. (2025). The shariah ruling on the permissibility of seafood in Hanafi and Shafi’i jurisprudence: A comparative study in the light of the Qur’an and Hadith. Amorti: Jurnal Studi Islam Interdisipliner, 4(3), 102–111. https://doi.org/10.59944/amorti.v4i3.467

LPPOM MUI. (2019). Hukum mengkonsumsi daging hiu. https://halalmui.org/hukum-mengkonsumsi-daging-hiu/

Prayoga, Y. (2024, August 30). Apakah halal memakan ikan hiu dan paus? NU Online Lampung. https://lampung.nu.or.id/syiar/apakah-halal-memakan-ikan-hiu-dan-paus-E8uz0

Saidin, N., & Yaakob, M. A. Z. (2025). Permissible and prohibited animals in Islam: Insights from the Qur’an and Hadis. Journal of Halal Science and Management Research, 1(1), 189–204. https://doi.org/10.24191/jhsmr.v1i1.8993