Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Eating Seafood is now Halal!

Rate this topic


_zahra

Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member
this is ridiculous.

What next...pork?

lol

there is even scientific proof that pork isn't good for one to digest

so i doubt he'll go that extreme :P

but there isn't harm eating other seafood animals (lobster...) that would jeopardize your well being

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When precaution is mentioned in resalah, it means you can look up another marja for the answer.

What your refering to is a differnt issue that is called ehtiyat wajib. This is when a scholar believes that to the best of their knowledge some thing is wajib, but states that there is a possibilty they could be wrong there fore its permissible to go follow another marja. Thats why its called ehtiyat wajib, its an ehtiyat that is wajib to follow according to the particular marja.

This rulling has nothing to do with ehtiyat wajib.

Fadhlullah has stated that in his previous rulling was ehtiyat wajib. (meaning that it was haram according to him to eat fish with out scales)

His new rulling is that it is not haram, but it should be avoided as a precaution (recomended precaution).

The old Fatwa: the impermissibility of eating what does not have scales of sea animals.

The new Fatwa: The Sayyed no longer considers not eating sea animals that do not have scales as on obligatory precaution, as he has been fully convinced that the evidence that call for their impermissibility are not sufficient

Thus, such a precaution becomes only recommendable. It is also preferred not to eat sea animals other than fish.

http://english.bayynat.org.lb/news/Miscellanous_27012009.htm

The mainstream opinion of our Ulamah is that fish with out scales is haram. For example here is the rulling of Sayed Seestani:

2624. * If a fish with scales is caught alive from water, and it dies thereafter, it is Pak and it is halal to eat it, even if the scales are shed off later due to some reasons. And if it dies in the water, it is Pak, but it is haraam to eat it. However, it is lawful to eat it if it dies in the net of the fisherman. A fish which has no scales is haraam even if it is brought alive from water and dies out of water.

Edited by Al-Mufeed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What your refering to is a differnt issue that is called ehtiyat wajib. This is when a scholar believes that to the best of their knowledge some thing is wajib, but states that there is a possibilty they could be wrong there fore its permissible to go follow another marja. Thats why its called ehtiyat wajib, its an ehtiyat that is wajib to follow according to the particular marja.

This rulling has nothing to do with ehtiyat wajib.

Fadhlullah has stated that in his previous rulling was ehtiyat wajib. (meaning that it was haram according to him to eat fish with out scales)

His new rulling is that it is not haram, but it should be avoided as a precaution (recomended precaution).

http://english.bayynat.org.lb/news/Miscellanous_27012009.htm

The mainstream opinion of our Ulamah is that fish with out scales is haram. For example here is the rulling of Sayed Seestani:

2624. * If a fish with scales is caught alive from water, and it dies thereafter, it is Pak and it is halal to eat it, even if the scales are shed off later due to some reasons. And if it dies in the water, it is Pak, but it is haraam to eat it. However, it is lawful to eat it if it dies in the net of the fisherman. A fish which has no scales is haraam even if it is brought alive from water and dies out of water.

I thought precaution was the same as ehtiyat wajib. My bad if it isn't the same. I usually only read the Farsi version of resalahs, so I'm sorry if i misguided anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Hmm...here's my observation

FACT 1: Quran said that forbidden food are ONLY dead meat, blood poured forth, flesh of swine, & meat on which a name has been invoked, other than Allah's

FACT 2: We are taught to not to accept hadiths if they are contradicting Al-Quran

FACT 3: We have hadiths stating additional forbidden food, including crab, squid, etc.

There are several possible stances for "contradiction" between FACT 1 & FACT 3:

POSSIBILITY 1: The hadiths should be rejected.

POSSIBILITY 2: Reconcile FACT 1 & FACT 3 by treating the food stated in the hadiths as strongly discouraged (makruh muakkad)

Until now, I still don't understand how the mainstream views could get into the conclusion of the forbidden food in the hadiths are also definitely forbidden (haram), though I could understand if a marja wishes to be (very) careful by saying we should abandon it altogether.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Salaam,

You know i thought and the reason why fish without scales isn't necessarily forbidden in the Qur'an because its not what the Arabs ate at the time. So Allah (swt) didn't put it in because they were already just eating fish with scales. Kinda like the scenario with Hijab, Qur'an doesn't say cover your head cause they were already doing that, just they showed off just about everything else.

my logic.

Wasalaam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Salaam,

You know i thought and the reason why fish without scales isn't necessarily forbidden in the Qur'an because its not what the Arabs ate at the time. So Allah (swt) didn't put it in because they were already just eating fish with scales. Kinda like the scenario with Hijab, Qur'an doesn't say cover your head cause they were already doing that, just they showed off just about everything else.

my logic.

Wasalaam

Imam al-Shafi'i edged you out on that one by a bit.

My translation of the Risalah:

555- Allah says to his Messenger: "Say I do not find in what is revealed to me forbidden to be eaten for whoever wants to eat unless it is a dead animal..." up to the end of the ayat.

556- The ayat bears two meanings; the first being: Nothing is forbidden for who wants to eat except what Allah has excepted.

557- And when this meaning is addressed to someone, they would naturally assume that no food is haram except what Allah has named haram. And this makes this meaning the apparent, general, and comprehensive meaning, which means even if the ayat bears another meaning, this should be the one to be chosen by the scholars to apply, unless the sunnah comes with a different meaning--which the ayat bears too--then it would be said: This is the meaning Allah intended.

558- Nothing should be considered "specific/exclusive" in the Qur'an or sunnah without an evidence in one or both of them. And no ayat can be considered exclusive unless it bears this exclusive meaning, otherwise, no explanation can be given for an ayat if the ayat doesn't bear it.

559- And the ayat, "Say I do not find revealed to me forbidden to be eaten for who wants to eat," can bear, "From something the Prophet was specifically asked about."

560- And bears, "From what you are used to eating," which is the most proper meaning, since the sunnah supports it.

561- Sufyan has related to us from Ibn Shihab from Ibn Idrees Al Khawlani from Ibn Tha'labah: "The Prophet has forbidden every predator with a fang".

562- Malik related to us from Ismael ibn Abi Hakeem from Ubaydah ibn Sufyan Al Hadhrami from Abu Hurayrah that the Prophet said: "Eating any predator with a fang is haram."

So, nothing is forbidden of what the people of the time "were accustomed to eating" [Khadduri translation p. 190].

"He allows them as lawful At Tayyibaat (i.e. all good and lawful as regards things, deeds, beliefs, persons and foods), and prohibits them as unlawful Al Khabaa’ith (i.e. all evil and unlawful as regards things, deeds, beliefs, persons and foods)" 7:157

Other Shafi'i scholars argued that not only is the ayat addressing food that was common for the Arabs to eat, but that the phrase, "For an eater who wants to eat," denotes foods that are normally considered to be edible, not any random animal, and moreover argue the context of some of the verses to show that they were addressing the mushrikeen, who for instance wouldn't eat a certain animal if it was a female, or stuff like that.

But, then again, Ibn Abbas didn't see it this way, and you have a report from an imam that attests to the literal meaning of the verse. Shafi'i was bent on reconciling the Qur'an and every hadith, whereas there is a report from Ibn Abbas that he just gave priority to the Qur'an in this situation and when asked for a ruling on the issue recited the verse.

Edited by avjar7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shafi`i mentions the fanged animal in this context as an additional prohibition, but my question would be even more specific: the dog. Considered in some extent najis by the majority of Muslims, Sunni and Shi`i, would one interpret the verse (if taken on an absolute level) to mean one could eat dogs, a najis animal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Salam Alaikum

I would just recommend those who know Arabic to read Wasael-ush-Shia and the other books of Hadeeth, and see the many ahadeeth which forbid the eating of fish which do not have scales.

As far as I am aware, there seems to be Ijma on the issue.

When a scholar goes against the Ijma in his ijtihad, he must also back it up with some proof for people to see. But in my numerous emails to his office, I have never received any satisfactory answer.

Yes I know, that is what I said in my post. According to Fadlallah it is now makruh, not haram anymore. Makruh literally means "hated". That which is hated by Allah swt. This doesn't matter at all to you?

There is a major difference between Makrooh and Haram (and remember other scholars have not issued "recommendations" on this, they have said that it is haram). Makrooh means allowed. Haram means forbidden. He will have to answer for those who blindly follow him.

Edited by Abbas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
There is a major difference between Makrooh and Haram (and remember other scholars have not issued "recommendations" on this, they have said that it is haram). Makrooh means allowed. Haram means forbidden. He will have to answer for those who blindly follow him.

Yes I know this. But you are wrong, makruh does not mean "allowed". Makruh literally means "hated". That which is hated. From the root word "kirah", or hate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member
Shafi`i mentions the fanged animal in this context as an additional prohibition, but my question would be even more specific: the dog. Considered in some extent najis by the majority of Muslims, Sunni and Shi`i, would one interpret the verse (if taken on an absolute level) to mean one could eat dogs, a najis animal?

The verse is very specific. Considering the priority of Quranic verses over hadiths, could you (or anyone) tell me how scholars of Shia & Sunni can arrive at the conclusions of additional haram foods?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...
Say: "I find not in the message received by me by inspiration any (meat) forbidden to be eaten by one who wishes to eat it, unless it be dead meat, or blood poured forth, or the flesh of swine,- for it is an abomination - or, what is impious, (meat) on which a name has been invoked, other than Allah.s". But (even so), if a person is forced by necessity, without wilful disobedience, nor transgressing due limits,- thy Lord is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. 6:145

So eat of the sustenance which Allah has provided for you, lawful and good; and be grateful for the favours of Allah, if it is He Whom ye serve. He has only forbidden you dead meat, and blood, and the flesh of swine, and any (food) over which the name of other than Allah has been invoked. But if one is forced by necessity, without wilful disobedience, nor transgressing due limits,- then Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. But say not - for any false thing that your tongues may put forth,- "This is lawful, and this is forbidden," so as to ascribe false things to Allah. For those who ascribe false things to Allah, will never prosper. 16:114-116

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?s=...t&p=1690288

æÚäå ¡ Úä ÚÈÏ ÇáÑÍãä Èä ÃÈí äÌÑÇä ¡ Úä ÚÇÕã Èä ÍãíÏ ¡ Úä ãÍãÏ Èä ãÓáã ¡ ÞÇá : ÓÃáÊ ÃÈÇ ÚÈÏ Çááå ( Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ) Úä ÇáÌÑøí æÇáãÇÑãÇåí æÇáÒãíÑ ¡ ( æãÇ áíÓ áå ÞÔÑ ) ãä ÇáÓãß ÃÍÑÇã åæ ¿ ÝÞÇá áí : íÇ ãÍãÏ ! ÇÞÑà åÐå ÇáÇíÉ ÇáÊí Ýí ÇáÇäÚÇã : ( Þá áÇ ÃÌÏ ÝíãÇ ÇæÍí Çáíø ãÍÑãÇ ) ÞÇá : ÝÞÑÃÊåÇ ÍÊì ÝÑÛÊ ãäåÇ ¡ ÝÞÇá : ÇäãÇ ÇáÍÑÇã ãÇ ÍÑã Çááå æÑÓæáå Ýí ßÊÇÈå ¡ æáßäåã ÞÏ ßÇäæÇ íÚÇÝæä ÃÔíÇÁ ¡ ÝäÍä äÚÇÝåÇ

Sahih from Muhammad b. Muslim. He said: I asked Abu `Abdillah about the al-jarii, the moray eel (al-maramahi), and az-zamir (a type of fish, I am unsure of its translation), and that of the fish [that does not have scales], is it haram? So he said to me: Oh Muhammad! Recite this ayat that is in al-An`am: “Say: 'I do not find, in what is revealed to me, aught forbidden.” He said: So I recited it until I was done with it. So he said: The haram is only that which Allah and His Messenger have forbidden in His Book. However, they (pl.) were averse to (some) things, so we are averse to them.

http://www.rafed.net/books/hadith/wasael-24/v06.html#51

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?s=...t&p=1790802

i wanted to ask you or anyone who thinks eating scaleless fish as permissible to all if they think it's okay to eat dogs or even feces since it's not in these verses? why or why not?

Edited by gogiison2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Moderators
i wanted to ask you or anyone who thinks eating scaleless fish as permissible to all if they think it's okay to eat dogs or even feces since it's not in these verses? why or why not?

Allah(s.w.a) gave us a brain in order to use it. Do you need a marja to tell you not to pee on yourself?

If something is najis (like dogs and feces definitely are) and will pollute your body from the outside, who would think it is ok to put it inside of yourself, i.e. your mouth?

Do you need a marjaa to tell you not to cross the street when there is a big truck coming?

Do you need a marjaa to tell you not to put your hand on a hot stove?

Give me a break ok.

Fish are halal, in general and not najis. So you can't compare them to dogs and feces.

There are some kind of fish that are haram to eat (like shell fish), but it doesn't mean they are najis.

Also, he still recommends to avoid fish w/o scales, so he is not saying to eat them, just switch from obligatory to recommended precaution.

He did not say mubah (permissible, no precondition).

Edited by Abu Hadi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Again, let's summarize the fatwa here in comparison to the "mainstream" view:

"Mainstream:" I strongly recommend you don't eat shellfish, crabs, lobster, octopus, etc.

Fadlallah: I recommend you don't eat shellfish, crabs, lobster, octopus, etc.

Wow. What a difference! Everybody break out the torches and pitchforks. Burn the heretic!

:lol: .. bro, i think people will use any excuse in the entire world to 'get him' so to speak.

In my opinion (as insignificant as it is), when a scholar actually takes time out to scientifically review fatwa's based on knowledge and evidence before him (as time goes on) .. that to me is the sign of an AWESOME scholar and exactly what i want to see of ALL our maraji` .. in this example.. shell-fish were never ever HARAM, they're considered makrooh - there is a HUGE difference.

Sayyid Fadhlallah is not saying break out the champagne bottles.. he's changed the DEFINITION slightly (if thats the right word) regarding this collective of food based on new scientific evidence of something that was never ever 'haram' in the first place. The fact that no other marja3 has looked into it does NOT make his fatwa any less valid.

Re what is in the Holy Qur'an, Imam Ja'far asSadiq (as) eloquently said (paraphrased): "any hadith which is not substantiated in the qur'an is not from us". The aya in the qur'an re HARAM food is very clear.. it's up to the research of marja3iyyeh to make an informed opinion on what's halal and/or makrooh.

Edited by Iman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
:lol: .. bro, i think people will use any excuse in the entire world to 'get him' so to speak.

In my opinion (as insignificant as it is), when a scholar actually takes time out to scientifically review fatwa's based on knowledge and evidence before him (as time goes on) .. that to me is the sign of an AWESOME scholar and exactly what i want to see of ALL our maraji` .. in this example.. shell-fish were never ever HARAM, they're considered makrooh - there is a HUGE difference.

Sayyid Fadhlallah is not saying break out the champagne bottles.. he's changed the DEFINITION slightly (if thats the right word) regarding this collective of food based on new scientific evidence of something that was never ever 'haram' in the first place. The fact that no other marja3 has looked into it does NOT make his fatwa any less valid.

Re what is in the Holy Qur'an, Imam Ja'far asSadiq (as) eloquently said (paraphrased): "any hadith which is not substantiated in the qur'an is not from us". The aya in the qur'an re HARAM food is very clear.. it's up to the research of marja3iyyeh to make an informed opinion on everything else.

Salams Sister,

From my understanding, shell fish are still makrooh. The fatwa was not addressing that issue.

It has to do with fish without scales

Shell fish includes crab, oyster, crawdads, lobster(although there is some controversy about this one)

Fish without scales are a different category from my understanding and include things like Catfish, shark, whale, etc.

Edited by Abu Hadi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Makrooh (obligatory precaution), according to Sayyid Fadlallah and marjaa that i know of.

I just checked Sistani.org I think he considers them haram

Question: Is it permissible to eat lobster, crayfish, and snails?

Answer: It is not permissible to eat from marine animals anything except fish that has scale; shrimp is considered from that category [of permissible sea animals]. But other than fish, like lobster, and similarly the fish that does not have scale is forbidden.

From Imam Khameni

Eating Crab and Squid

Q: What is your opinion about eating crab and squid?

A: Eating them is impermissible.

So impermissable could mean makrooh or haram. If you need more clarification, I could try to hunt thru the arabic section.

Edited by Abu Hadi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Allah(s.w.a) gave us a brain in order to use it. Do you need a marja to tell you not to pee on yourself?

If something is najis (like dogs and feces definitely are) and will pollute your body from the outside, who would think it is ok to put it inside of yourself, i.e. your mouth?

Do you need a marjaa to tell you not to cross the street when there is a big truck coming?

Do you need a marjaa to tell you not to put your hand on a hot stove?

Give me a break ok.

Fish are halal, in general and not najis. So you can't compare them to dogs and feces.

There are some kind of fish that are haram to eat (like shell fish), but it doesn't mean they are najis.

Also, he still recommends to avoid fish w/o scales, so he is not saying to eat them, just switch from obligatory to recommended precaution.

He did not say mubah (permissible, no precondition).

you say dogs are najis definately. did you read it from the Quran? i read a hadith saying something like: feces or urine of halaal to consume animals are considered pak and we can pray if it gets on our clothes. of course we must use our brains. we shouldn't rely on scholars for everything, especially when some may be very liberal. even the jews will only eat the scaled fish, is it makruh for them to eat scaleless? we all use our brains, but only some of us refer to teachings of masooms and Quran when trying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we had a similar crises here in australia

suddenly people started eating all sorts of things like lobster, octopus, and then when asked they said fadhallah

when we investigated we saw that fadhallah has not said anything as such far as our investigation went.

the only thing that fadhallah said was about the fish with no scale...

most scholars say its haraam on an obligatory precaution (meaning they are not 100% sure that its haraam) fadhlallah said its haraam on a recommended precaution ( meaning its hallal but only recommended to take the precaution and avoid it)

So we still didnt find where he said its okay to eat lobster and octopus and shelfish and all those strange things...

If we look back at the jews they have the same laws and they also only allow the fish with scales... I am a follower of fadhallah but i would never eat the fish with no scale without any obvious evidence that its hallal ..

the verse doesn't prove that all the things in the sea are hallal otherwise we could say the poisonous snake is also hallal. the verse says " the sea food was made halal for you" is referring to a specific category of the seafood.

just like the verse that says " the food of ahlulkitab is made lawful for you" obviously its not referring haraam foods like pork or meat which was not done in a hallal way.

I want to see the fatwa that says any thing other than the scaleless fish is hallal i am very interested to know, not saying the next say i will be in a Chinese restaurant like i have just come out from a hunger strike but i want to know the issue because it has caused controversy here as well.

from common sense i say whats the chance that Jews and christian all say that eating shellfish is an abomination and Islamic literature also agrees with that ? whats the chance that they all agree on a wrong prohibition of a lawful. am not saying its impossible but it needs study.

Edited by alimohamad40
Link to comment
Share on other sites

æÚäå ¡ Úä ãÍãÏ Èä ÃÈí ÚãíÑ ¡ Úä ÚãÑ Èä ÇÐíäÉ ¡ Úä ÒÑÇÑÉ ¡ ÞÇá : ÓÃáÊ ( ÃÈÇ ÚÈÏ Çááå ) ( Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ) Úä ÇáÌÑíË ¿ ÝÞÇá : æãÇ ÇáÌÑíË ¿ ÝäÚÊå áå ¡ ÝÞÇá : ( Þá áÇ ÃÌÏ ÝíãÇ ÃæÍí Åáíø ãÍÑãÇ Úáì ØÇÚã íØÚãå ) Åáì ÂÎÑ ÇáÇíÉ ¡ Ëã ÞÇá : áã íÍÑã Çááå ÔíÆÇ ãä ÇáÍíæÇä Ýí ÇáÞÑÂä ¡ ÇáÇ ÇáÎäÒíÑ ÈÚíäå ¡ æíßÑå ßá ÔíÁ ãä ÇáÈÍÑ áíÓ áå ÞÔÑ ãËá ÇáæÑÞ ¡ æáíÓ ÈÍÑÇã ¡ ÅäãÇ åæ ãßÑæå

Sahih from Zurara. He said: I ask (Abu `Abdillahs (as)) about the eel (al-jarith). So he said: And what is al-jarith? So I described it for him. So he said: “Say: 'I do not find, in what is revealed to me, aught forbidden to him who eats thereof” until the end of the ayat. Then he said: Allah has not forbidden anything from the animals in the Quran except for the pig in itself. And everything of the sea that does not have scales leaves is disliked, and it is not haram, it is only makruh.

http://www.*******.org/hadiths/food-and-drink-1/fish

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
Eating Crab and Squid

Q: What is your opinion about eating crab and squid?

A: Eating them is impermissible.

:cry:

For all the time I have been enjoying self prepared crab sandwiches with a thin layer of mayo. . .I have been committing haram?

I was on a seafood feast and have been eating prawns and shrimps and tuna etc. Which of those are haram? :squeez:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
:cry:

For all the time I have been enjoying self prepared crab sandwiches with a thin layer of mayo. . .I have been committing haram?

I was on a seafood feast and have been eating prawns and shrimps and tuna etc. Which of those are haram? :squeez:

Shrimp and tuna are halal, according to all marjaa. I think prawns are the giant shrimp right?

The crab sandwiches are not. Dump the crab and you'll be ok

Even if you switch to Sayyid Fadlallah, you still can't eat crab, he only changed his opinion on scaleless fish

I wouldn't recommend switching just so you could eat catfish, lol.

BTW, I was eating calimari for about 5 years after I reverted to Islam. I thought it was fish.

Then someone told me it was squid. So we all went thru these things. I know some here will cry about that

Yes, it tastes good, but it's squid so stop eating it! (not talking to you marbles but some br who will remain nameless). Sorry to break some hearts.

Edited by Abu Hadi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
just like the verse that says " the food of ahlulkitab is made lawful for you" obviously its not referring haraam foods like pork or meat which was not done in a hallal way.

Just what I was going to say...

you say dogs are najis definately. did you read it from the Quran? i read a hadith saying something like: feces or urine of halaal to consume animals are considered pak and we can pray if it gets on our clothes. of course we must use our brains. we shouldn't rely on scholars for everything, especially when some may be very liberal. even the jews will only eat the scaled fish, is it makruh for them to eat scaleless? we all use our brains, but only some of us refer to teachings of masooms and Quran when trying.

The Quran does not tell us how many rukats to pray for 5 prayers. So should we just make up a number?

No, we use Sunnat and reliable Hadith

The Quran, in most cases, establishes general principles which are expanded on by Prophet (pbuh)and Imams (as)

There are some exceptions where Quran is specific, like rules of inheritance and who you can and cannot marry, but mostly

this is not the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...