Ibrahim Ahmad

Happy Husband | Co-founder of 4 lovely kids | Covid-19 Survivor | Physicist |Agricultural Economist | Food Processor| Garkuwan Almajiran Nigeria|

[Ibrahim Ahmad @ChiefAhmad]

𝐔𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐋𝐚𝐬𝐭 𝐒𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐨𝐧 𝐎𝐟 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐭 𝐌𝐮𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐝 (𝐏𝐁𝐔𝐇)

In the name of Allah, The Beneficent, The Merciful. May the peace and blessings of Allah be upon the noble Prophet, Muhammad, & upon his household & companions.

A thread!!

[Ibrahim Ahmad @ChiefAhmad]

Jazakallahu khairan for taking the time to respond and for providing the references and photographs. I appreciate that.

To be fair, when I raised the issue, it was because I had personally checked my own copy of Sheikh Abubakar Mahmud Gumi's Tafsir and could not find the statements you attributed to him. Naturally, that raised concerns regarding the authenticity of the quotation.

Now that you have provided photographs from other sources attributed to the Sheikh, the matter becomes more nuanced than I initially thought.

The interesting question now is: why do these statements appear in the copies and compilations you referenced, yet they are absent from my own copy of the Tafsir?

I will attach a photograph from my copy so that readers can see the difference for themselves.

At this stage, I am not prepared to make a definitive judgment either way. Several possibilities exist:

1. The statements genuinely belong to Sheikh Gumi and were omitted from later editions, as you claim.

2. The statements were added later by editors, publishers, students, or compilers and were not originally part of the Sheikh's work.

3. Different manuscript traditions or editions were used, resulting in variations between copies.

This is a matter that deserves careful investigation rather than assumptions from either side. I intend, in shaa Allah, to research it further before reaching a final conclusion.

That said, even if we assume for the sake of argument that these statements are authentically from Sheikh Abubakar Mahmud Gumi, that still does not settle the fiqh issue under discussion.

The permissibility of bank interest does not stand or fall on the opinion of a single scholar, regardless of his stature. Sheikh Gumi was a respected scholar, but he was not the final authority in Islam, nor was he immune from error. Every scholar's opinion is accepted or rejected based on the strength of its evidence.

More importantly, the view that modern currencies (fulūs) are not subject to the rulings of ribā, and that bank interest is therefore permissible, remains a minority position among both classical and contemporary scholars.

The overwhelming majority of contemporary fiqh councils, Islamic finance experts, and scholars across the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, and Hanbali schools have concluded that modern currencies possess the legal function of money (thamaniyyah), and that ribā applies to them just as it applied to the currencies used in earlier times.

Therefore, even if the quotation is authentic, it merely establishes that Sheikh Gumi held a particular opinion. It does not establish that the opinion is correct, nor does it negate the substantial body of evidence advanced by the majority of scholars who maintain that ribā applies to modern currencies and that conventional bank interest remains prohibited.

For now, I thank you for providing the references. I will continue investigating the issue of the differing editions and will revise my position regarding the attribution if the evidence ultimately supports its authenticity.

As for the fiqh discussion itself, I remain unconvinced that the evidence presented establishes the permissibility of bank interest.

Wallahu a'lam.

[Ibrahim Ahmad @ChiefAhmad]

I was skeptical about the authenticity of the quotation you attributed to Sheikh Abubakar Mahmud Gumi, because to the best of my knowledge, Sheikh Abubakar Gumi never preached such opinion.

So I took my time to consult my own copy of Sheikh Gumi's Tafsir on the verse:

﴿ يَمْحَقُ اللَّهُ الرِّبَا وَيُرْبِي الصَّدَقَاتِ ﴾

and I could not find the passage you attributed to him, particularly the portion claiming:

«"فائدة : معروف أن بيوع الربا مقيدة على عيون الأشياء الربوية لا على قيمها، فأوراق البنوك أو العملة المستعملة اليوم قيم لها في البنوك من الأملاك وإن كانت تستعمل للأثمان، فكل مبيع ثمني وليس كل ثمني ربوياً. فعلى هذا ففوائد البنوك أجور. والله أعلم."»

This statement is not a minor detail in your article. It is one of the central pillars upon which your entire argument rests. Therefore, it is only fair that you provide clear evidence that Sheikh Abubakar Gumi actually said it.

Kindly provide:

1. The exact volume and page number of the Tafsir.
2. A clear photograph or screenshot of the original page.
3. The complete Arabic text as it appears in the book, without additions or omissions.

If the quotation genuinely exists, then producing the page should be straightforward and will immediately settle the matter.

However, if you cannot produce the page, then serious concerns arise regarding the attribution. It is not permissible to place words in the mouth of a scholar, especially in matters as grave as ribā, and then build an entire argument upon those words.

The scholars have long warned:

«من بركة العلم عزوه إلى قائله»

"Part of the blessing of knowledge is attributing it correctly to its source."

And Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak said:

«الإسناد من الدين»

"The chain of attribution is part of the religion."

We are discussing a matter that Allah and His Messenger ﷺ treated with the utmost seriousness. Therefore, academic integrity and honesty demand that every quotation be verifiable.

Until the source is produced, the quotation remains unsubstantiated. And if the foundation of an argument is shown to be unreliable, then it is only natural that the conclusions built upon it will also be viewed with skepticism.

So let us begin there:

Please show us the page in Sheikh Abubakar Mahmud Gumi's Tafsir from which this quotation was taken.

If the quotation is authentic, we will acknowledge it.

If it is not, then the readers deserve to know that you falsely ascribe the statement to Sheikh Abubakar Gumi so as to give credence to your own opinion and that of your likes.

والله المستعان.

[Ibrahim Ahmad @ChiefAhmad]

@alqary_emran https://t.co/iMRQ7QkqYl

[Ibrahim Ahmad @ChiefAhmad]

Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim

A Respectful Response to the Claim that "Bank Interest Is Not Ribā"

May Allah reward our brother, @alqary_emran, for attempting to discuss a difficult issue with what he presented as evidence and scholarly references. However, several of the conclusions reached in his article are not supported by the strongest positions of the classical jurists, nor by the principles of usūl al-fiqh employed by the majority of scholars throughout Islamic history.

1. The Claim That Modern Bank Loans Are Not Loans (Qard)

The article argues that bank financing is fundamentally different from qard because banks are commercial institutions rather than charitable entities.

This argument confuses the purpose of a transaction with its legal reality.

In fiqh, a qard is defined as the transfer of ownership of fungible property with an obligation to return its equivalent.

When a bank advances ₦1,000,000 to a customer and requires the customer to return ₦1,200,000, the legal reality is that ownership of money was transferred and repayment of the principal was required.

The fact that the lender is a corporation rather than an individual does not alter the legal nature of the transaction.

The juristic maxim cited by the author actually works against his conclusion:

العبرة في العقود للمقاصد والمعاني لا للألفاظ والمباني

"Consideration in contracts is given to meanings and realities, not merely words and forms."

The reality of a conventional loan remains:

1. Money is advanced.
2. Repayment is guaranteed.
3. An additional amount is stipulated.

This is precisely the structure that the classical jurists described as ribā al-duyūn (ribā of debts).

2. Mudarabah and Bank Lending Are Not the Same Thing

The article suggests that bank financing resembles mudarabah or qirād.

This comparison is problematic.

A genuine mudarabah has the following characteristics:

• Profit is uncertain.
• The capital provider bears financial risk.
• Losses are borne by capital except in cases of negligence.
• No fixed return is guaranteed.

Conventional bank lending has the opposite characteristics:

• Return is fixed in advance.
• Principal is guaranteed.
• The lender bears minimal commercial risk.
• Payment is due whether the venture succeeds or fails.

The classical jurists unanimously held that if a mudarabah contract guarantees capital and a predetermined return, it ceases to be mudarabah.

Thus conventional interest-bearing lending cannot accurately be described as mudarabah.

3. The Appeal to Ibn Taymiyyah Does Not Support the Conclusion

The article invokes Ibn Taymiyyah's principle that new transactions are permissible.

This is true.

However, Ibn Taymiyyah also repeatedly emphasized that the objectives and realities behind transactions must be examined.

He wrote that prohibited transactions remain prohibited even if people change their names.

The same Ibn Taymiyyah who permitted new commercial instruments also regarded stratagems used to legalize ribā as invalid.

Therefore citing Ibn Taymiyyah's openness to new contracts does not establish that interest-bearing debt is permissible.

The question is not whether modern banking is new.

The question is whether its substance contains the prohibited increase on debt.

4. Inflation Does Not Transform Ribā Into Permissible Compensation

The article argues that interest merely restores lost purchasing power.

Several observations should be made.

First, interest rates and inflation rates are often completely different.

A bank may charge 25% while inflation is 10%.

The excess clearly exceeds compensation for depreciation.

Second, classical jurists discussed currency depreciation centuries before modern banking.

Many allowed adjustment in exceptional cases of severe monetary collapse.

However, they did not conclude that every stipulated increase on debt therefore becomes lawful.

[Ibrahim Ahmad @ChiefAhmad]

Third, if inflation alone justified predetermined increases on loans, then the explicit prohibition of deferred increases in debt contracts would become largely meaningless.

5. The Statement of Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib Does Not End the Discussion

The article cites Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib:

"There is no ribā except in gold, silver, and what is measured or weighed from food and drink."

No serious scholar denies this narration.

The question is whether it represents the final legal conclusion on every future form of money.

The four schools disagreed over the effective cause ('illah) of ribā.

Many jurists concluded that the prohibition extends beyond the six named commodities through qiyās.

Otherwise paper money, checks, electronic money, & modern currencies would fall completely outside the law of ṣarf, which is a conclusion rejected by the overwhelming majority of contemporary jurists.

6. The Four Madhhabs Did Not Unanimously Exclude Fulūs

The article repeatedly claims that all four schools excluded fulūs from ribā.

This claim is inaccurate.

Numerous jurists held that when fulūs become the accepted medium of exchange, they acquire the rulings of money.

Among the strongest examples is the Hanafi discussion of thamaniyyah.

Al-Kāsānī explains in Bada'i al-Sana'i that when fulūs become people's circulating currency, they take the rulings of money.

Likewise, later jurists such as Ibn Taymiyyah & Ibn al-Qayyim argued that the monetary function of an item is central to many rulings.

Thus the issue was never as simple as "gold and silver only."

7. The Existence of Fulūs During the Time of the Companions Does Not Prove the Author's Conclusion

The article cites a report mentioning fulūs during the era of Abu Dharr.

Even if accepted, this proves only that copper coins existed.

It does not prove that:

• they were the primary currency;
• they possessed full monetary status;
• the Companions agreed that ribā could never apply to them.

Existence is one issue.

Legal classification is another.

Horses existed during the Prophet's time, yet jurists later differed regarding zakāh on trade horses.

The mere existence of an item does not settle every legal ruling connected to it.

8. The Analogy With Coffee and Photography Is Misplaced

The coffee and photography examples concern errors arising from shared terminology.

The ribā debate is different.

No one claims that bank interest is prohibited merely because it shares a name with ribā.

Rather, scholars argue that it shares the same operative reality:

a debt generating a predetermined increase because of time.

This is a substantive argument, not a linguistic one.

9. The Overwhelming Majority of Fiqh Bodies Disagree

Virtually every major fiqh academy has concluded that conventional bank interest falls under ribā.

Among them are:

• The Islamic Fiqh Academy of the OIC
• The International Islamic Fiqh Academy
• The Fiqh Council of the Muslim World League
• AAOIFI's Shariah Standards
• Numerous senior scholars from the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, and Hanbali schools

One may disagree with these institutions, but it is inaccurate to portray the issue as though the permissibility of bank interest is the obvious continuation of classical fiqh.

10. The Strongest Principle in the Matter

The strongest principle remains the one emphasized by Ibn al-Qayyim:

"The law revolves around its meanings and objectives."

Gold & silver were not prohibited because of their metallic composition.

Ribā was prohibited because it involved a guaranteed increase attached to debt.

If a new form of money performs the same economic function as money in the Prophet's time, and the same increase is stipulated because of time, then the jurist must examine whether the same legal cause exists.

The question is not:

"Is this gold?"

The question is:

"Does this transaction contain the same legally operative cause that the Shari'ah prohibited?"

That is where the real debate lies.

And Allah knows best.

[Ibrahim Ahmad @ChiefAhmad]

Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim

A Respectful Response to the Claim that "Bank Interest Is Not Ribā"

May Allah reward our brother, @alqary_emran, for attempting to discuss a difficult issue with what he presented as evidence and scholarly references. However, several of the conclusions reached in his article are not supported by the strongest positions of the classical jurists, nor by the principles of usūl al-fiqh employed by the majority of scholars throughout Islamic history.

1. The Claim That Modern Bank Loans Are Not Loans (Qard)

The article argues that bank financing is fundamentally different from qard because banks are commercial institutions rather than charitable entities.

This argument confuses the purpose of a transaction with its legal reality.

In fiqh, a qard is defined as the transfer of ownership of fungible property with an obligation to return its equivalent.

When a bank advances ₦1,000,000 to a customer and requires the customer to return ₦1,200,000, the legal reality is that ownership of money was transferred and repayment of the principal was required.

The fact that the lender is a corporation rather than an individual does not alter the legal nature of the transaction.

The juristic maxim cited by the author actually works against his conclusion:

العبرة في العقود للمقاصد والمعاني لا للألفاظ والمباني

"Consideration in contracts is given to meanings and realities, not merely words and forms."

The reality of a conventional loan remains:

1. Money is advanced.
2. Repayment is guaranteed.
3. An additional amount is stipulated.

This is precisely the structure that the classical jurists described as ribā al-duyūn (ribā of debts).

2. Mudarabah and Bank Lending Are Not the Same Thing

The article suggests that bank financing resembles mudarabah or qirād.

This comparison is problematic.

A genuine mudarabah has the following characteristics:

• Profit is uncertain.
• The capital provider bears financial risk.
• Losses are borne by capital except in cases of negligence.
• No fixed return is guaranteed.

Conventional bank lending has the opposite characteristics:

• Return is fixed in advance.
• Principal is guaranteed.
• The lender bears minimal commercial risk.
• Payment is due whether the venture succeeds or fails.

The classical jurists unanimously held that if a mudarabah contract guarantees capital and a predetermined return, it ceases to be mudarabah.

Thus conventional interest-bearing lending cannot accurately be described as mudarabah.

3. The Appeal to Ibn Taymiyyah Does Not Support the Conclusion

The article invokes Ibn Taymiyyah's principle that new transactions are permissible.

This is true.

However, Ibn Taymiyyah also repeatedly emphasized that the objectives and realities behind transactions must be examined.

He wrote that prohibited transactions remain prohibited even if people change their names.

The same Ibn Taymiyyah who permitted new commercial instruments also regarded stratagems used to legalize ribā as invalid.

Therefore citing Ibn Taymiyyah's openness to new contracts does not establish that interest-bearing debt is permissible.

The question is not whether modern banking is new.

The question is whether its substance contains the prohibited increase on debt.

4. Inflation Does Not Transform Ribā Into Permissible Compensation

The article argues that interest merely restores lost purchasing power.

Several observations should be made.

First, interest rates and inflation rates are often completely different.

A bank may charge 25% while inflation is 10%.

The excess clearly exceeds compensation for depreciation.

Second, classical jurists discussed currency depreciation centuries before modern banking.

Many allowed adjustment in exceptional cases of severe monetary collapse.

However, they did not conclude that every stipulated increase on debt therefore becomes lawful.

[TOPFOODS AFRICA @GetTopFoods]

@BrendaEbyslady Check out the proposal in the link below and see if if its something you will like to invest in.

https://t.co/umuNZziZZX

[Ibrahim Ahmad @ChiefAhmad]

Hello Joe. Peace be unto you.

I read your write-up, & honestly, I appreciate the way you handled the subject. Most people either avoid topics like religion completely or approach them with an agenda, but you managed to stay balanced & thoughtful. That alone is worth acknowledging.

I’m writing this as someone who practices Islam, not to argue, not to “win,” but just to share a perspective the way you shared yours.

You pointed out something important: both Islam and Christianity share a deep connection. Any Muslim who truly knows their faith understands that our belief isn’t complete unless we accept Jesus, Moses, and all the prophets who came before Muhammad (peace be upon them all). The Qur’an constantly reminds us that God’s message didn’t begin in 7th-century Arabia, it’s a continuation of the same call that started long before, with the same God guiding different communities through different prophets.

But yes, the differences are real. Islam doesn’t hide from them, and you explained them accurately. Where Christianity builds its theology around original sin and the divinity of Jesus, Islam returns to a simpler structure: God is absolutely One, without partners, without descendants, without intermediaries. Every soul is responsible for its own deeds. Forgiveness is always near. Salvation doesn’t require someone else’s sacrifice, it requires sincerity, repentance, and effort.

As Muslims, we don’t see Jesus as less honoured because he isn’t divine; in fact, his humanity is part of his greatness. To perform miracles, to speak truth, to stand firm in the face of opposition, without being divine, that’s powerful. The Qur’an preserves his story with reverence, but it redirects the worship back to the One who sent him.

You mentioned something that caught my attention, that you believe the supernatural exists, and that every person must find their own doorway to it. I relate to that feeling, but Islam would say the “doorway” isn’t meant to be discovered by accident or personal interpretation. God didn’t leave humanity wandering in the dark; He sent guidance repeatedly, through scripture and prophets, so we don’t have to guess our way to the truth. Faith in Islam isn’t meant to be a maze, it’s meant to be a path.

But at the end of the day, I respect your honesty. You didn’t speak arrogantly, and you didn’t demean anyone’s belief. As a Muslim, I appreciate that. Discussions like this don’t need to turn into contests. Sometimes it’s enough for people to share what they’ve come to understand, and let the rest unfold as God wills.

May God guide your heart, increase you in clarity, and keep all of us sincere in our search for truth.

Peace.

[LEGENDARY J.O.E @LegendaryJoe]

ISLAM VS CHRISTIANITY

Ok.

I understand your curiosity, and I will entertain your question despite the sensitive nature of the subject.

ON MY FAITH

I am not an active practitioner of any religion at the moment, and by active, I mean: a Muslim may be expected to go to the mosque and pray five times a day - I do not. And a Christian may also be expected to attend church services, at least on Sundays; pay tithe and offering; identify with a denomination - I also do not.

But joyfully, I am convinced the supernatural exists. Every man must find his own doorway into the unseen, that mysterious corridor where flesh collides with spirit and the ordinary bows to the eternal.

ARE BOTH RELIGIONS THE SAME?

Both noble religions, Christianity and Islam, share striking similarities - echoes of the same ancient Source reverberating through different traditions. For instance:

1. Both are Abrahamic religions.

2. Both are monotheistic - believing in ONE supreme, all-powerful, all-knowing God who created and sustains the universe.

3. Both revere Jesus as a towering figure in their faiths.

4. Both believe in the virgin birth of Jesus.

5. Both believe in the Day of Judgement, when humanity will be resurrected and God will weigh every deed. Heaven and Hell stand as shared destinies.

6. Both acknowledge a common adversary - Satan.

7. Both share sacred stories: the creation of Adam, Noah’s Ark, Moses and the Exodus, the miracles of Jesus…

8. Both affirm the second coming of Christ.

The above makes it clear that both faiths walk parallel paths marked by similar beliefs, similar histories, and similar spiritual motifs.

However, Islam and Christianity are not the same religion. No sir! They aren’t.

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ISLAM AND CHRISTIANITY

Despite the wide range of similarities between both religions, their core foundations diverge sharply. Because of these fundamental dissimilarities, they cannot be said to be the same religion - neither can it be casually suggested that they serve the same God.

The Christian Bible predates the Islamic Qur’an by nearly 600 years. And if you trace the earliest parts of the Bible, you’d be staring at almost 1,600 years before the Qur’an’s revelation.

Naturally, the Christian scriptures make no reference to Islam or the Qur’an. But the Qur’an, having the advantage of recency, draws clear theological lines that separate the two. And these include:

1. ORIGINAL SIN

Christianity teaches that Adam’s fall infected humanity and demanded the sacrifice of the Second Adam - Jesus.

Islam says, “Not so.”

The Qur’an firmly rejects this.

Qur’an 6:164; 17:15; 35:18
“No bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another.”
This directly challenges the idea of one man paying for the sins of another.

Furthermore, the Qur’an clarifies that Adam’s error was forgiven - eliminating any theological need for a “Second Adam.”

Qur’an 2:37
“Then Adam received words from his Lord, and He accepted his repentance.”

2. THE DIVINITY OF JESUS

Islam honours Jesus - but not as divine, and not as the Son of God.

Qur’an 4:171
“The Messiah… was only a Messenger of Allah.”

Qur’an 19:35
“It is not befitting for Allah to take a son.”

Qur’an 112:1–4
“Allah begets not, nor is He begotten.”

To Christians, Jesus is far more than a prophet - He is the Son of God and the second member of the Godhead.

3. CRUCIFIXION

For Christians, the crucifixion is the beating heart of the faith - the axis around which redemption revolves. Without the cross, Christianity collapses.

But the Qur’an presents a different narrative:

Qur’an 4:157–158
“They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him - it was made to appear so…”

CONCLUSION

I have studied both religions. I have a fair grasp of their scriptures and their philosophies. I do not hold a particular preference. But this is clear, unshakeable, and undeniable:

Both religions are great, both are vast, both are powerful - but they are NOT the same.

Good Morning Severally.

[Fruit Trees Projects @FruitTreesNg]

Give Your Children a Gift Time Cannot Destroy: Why Parents Are Turning to Fruit Tree Plantations

Every parent wants to give their children something solid, something that will stand by them long after school, long after you’ve retired, and long after the noise of today’s economy has faded.

But let’s be honest…

Saving money for children is getting harder. School fees rise yearly. Inflation swallows cash. Jobs are more competitive. And even real estate is becoming too expensive for many families starting out.
That’s why more Nigerian parents are now choosing an investment that is simple, affordable, and future-proof:

Fruit tree plantations.

Not stocks. Not crypto. Not high-risk ventures.
Just trees; quiet, dependable, income-producing trees.

Because when you plant a fruit tree today in your child’s name, you’re planting a lifetime asset.

Why Fruit Tree Plantations Are Becoming the New “Children’s Savings Account”

1. They produce income every single year
Coconut trees can produce for 30 to 100 years. That means the investment you make for your child at age 2 could still be paying them when they are 40.
No bank savings can do that. No scholarship fund lasts that long. No job is guaranteed that long.

But coconut trees? They don’t get tired.

2. You don’t wait 20 years to see results

In a well-designed coconut plantation system, early yielding crops like pawpaw are planted in between the coconut trees. They begin fruiting from Year 1, giving quick cashflow long before the coconut matures.

So your child benefits:

⬝ Immediately (Year 1–3 from pawpaw)
⬝ And for decades (from coconuts)

This is what real generational planning and wealth building looks like.

3. You’re giving them land + lifelong income

Children inherit two problems today:

⬝ A world that’s more expensive
⬝ A future that’s more uncertain

But when you give a child productive plantation, you’re giving them:

⬝ A permanent landed asset
⬝ A yearly income-producing engine
⬝ A hedge against inflation
⬝ A financial safety net for life

This is one of the most meaningful gifts a parent can give.

4. It prepares them for adulthood long before adulthood arrives

Imagine your child at:

⬝ 10, earning consistent passive revenue
⬝ 18, using proceeds for university
⬝ 25, funding their business
⬝ 30, paying rent with coconut harvest income
⬝ 40–50, still benefiting from trees you planted decades earlier

That’s not an investment. That’s legacy.

5. It is stress-free for you

⬝ No tenant issues.
⬝ No repairs.
⬝ No complex management.

Modern plantations use:

⬝ Irrigation systems
⬝ Improved coconut seedling varieties
⬝ Professional management teams

You’re not farming. You’re owning an income-producing asset.

If you believe your children deserve a future that isn’t controlled by inflation, job markets, or unpredictable economies…

If you want to give them something that will outlive you…

If you want an investment that grows quietly as your children grow…

Then fruit trees plantation is one of the most heartfelt and wise decisions you can make today.

Plant a Tree Today, Secure Your Children's Future for Decades

We are in the process of setting up a coconut plantation estate in Kwali Area Council, FCT, Abuja, Nigeria.

It is structured, managed, affordable, and designed with long-term income in mind.

You and other parents will like it because:

⬝ You can start with ₦900,000 for a plot
⬝ An acre and hectare options are also available
⬝ Land comes fully set up with coconut + pawpaw
⬝ Irrigation, water supply, and 1-year management included
⬝ Returns begin from Year 1
⬝ Coconuts produce for 30–100 years
⬝ You or your child own the land 100% plus the trees planted on it. Full documentation is provided

After the first year, you can either:

• Take over management yourself, or
• Retain our management service for a 30% revenue share.

This is not a one-season opportunity. It’s a lifelong one.

Reach out via:
Email: [email protected]
WhatsApp: [phone]
Read and Download Brochure via google drive link: https://t.co/vRVoZMTdey

Limited units available - get yours today before they’re sold out!

[Fruit Trees Projects @FruitTreesNg]

Fruit Plantation vs. Rental Property in Abuja: Which Investment Makes More Sense Today?

For many investors, the default path has always been real estate. Buy land. Build houses. Collect rent. It’s familiar, tangible, and socially celebrated.

But a quiet shift is happening.

More Nigerians, especially smart, long-term investors, are now adding managed fruit tree plantations to their portfolios. And the numbers coming from well-structured projects are beginning to compete directly with traditional real estate returns.

If you’re torn between investing in a rental building or a productive fruit plantation, here is a clear, balanced comparison that may help you decide.

1. Cost of Entry

Rental Building

Land in Abuja: from ₦15M–₦50M per plot (depending on district)

Construction (4–6 units): ₦70M–₦200M+

Finishing, documentation, supervision, and miscellaneous costs add even more.

Total first investment: Often ₦100M–₦250M+

Fruit Tree Plantation

In a modern managed estate such as the FruitTreesNg integrated coconut + pawpaw plantation in Kwali:

Plot (500sqm): ₦900,000
Acre: ₦6,000,000
Hectare: ₦14,000,000

This costs covers Land + documentation, Plantation setup, Irrigation system and First-year professional management.

Total first investment: ₦900K–₦14M, depending on unit size.

✔️ Winner: Fruit Trees Plantation (more affordable)

2. Return on Investment

Rental Property in Abuja

Average rental yield: 4%–7% annually

Payback period: 15–22 years

ROI is stable but moderate.

Fruit Tree Plantation

Based on the projections from the Kwali coconut estate:

Pawpaw income starts from Year 1

Coconut begins in Year 3, matures from Year 4

Expected annual coconut revenue increases 10–20% annually as trees grow

Example ROI (per hectare):

Year 1: ₦8M
Year 2: ₦8M+
Year 3: ₦17M
Year 4: ₦18M
Year 5+: ₦19.8M+ with annual growth

Average ROI: 50%–80% annually

Payback period: 2–3 years

✔️ Winner: Fruit Trees Plantation (higher & faster cash flow)

3. Asset Lifespan

Rental Building

• Buildings deteriorate over time.
• Major renovation required after 25–30 years.

Fruit Plantation

Most fruit trees produce consistently for 30–100 years with little maintenance.

Trees get more productive as they age.

✔️ Winner: Fruit Plantation

4. Stress & Management

Rental Property

•Maintenance calls
•Tenant issues
•Vacancies
•Repairs & renovations
•Property management fees

Fruit Tree Plantation

In our Kwali project:

•Full setup + 12 months management included

•After Year 1, you can take over yourself or allow continuous professional management for 30% revenue share

•No tenants. No repairs. No monthly headaches.

✔️ Winner: Fruit Plantation

5. Risk Comparison

Rental Property

•Market downturns
•Unpaid rent
•Structural wear
•Demolition risks in uncertified areas
•High maintenance costs

Fruit Tree Plantation

•Agricultural risks (weather, pests)
But with modern systems:
✓Drip irrigation
✓Improved seedlings varieties
✓Intercropping
✓Expert farm managers

…the major risks are significantly reduced.

✔️ Winner: Tie (each has manageable risks)

6. Land Value Appreciation

Both assets benefit from rising land value in Abuja.

But an agricultural estate gives you:

•Land appreciation plus
•Significant income from the trees

✔️ Winner: Tie

Final Thoughts

Both investments are excellent but they serve different purposes.

Rental Property gives urban income + long-term capital appreciation + tangible structures and tenants

Fruit Plantations gives:

•Affordable entry
•Fast, strong yearly cashflow
•Decades of passive income
•Hands-free management
•A hedge against inflation
•Land ownership

A Gentle Invitation

If the numbers and long-term benefits of fruit tree investing make sense to you, our fully managed Coconut Plantation Estate in Kwali, Abuja is now open for subscription.

Starting from ₦90k per plot

Land + documentation included

Visit Google drive link for details: https://t.co/vRVoZMSFp0

[Ibrahim Ahmad @ChiefAhmad]

@alqary_emran May Allah guide us to truth and protect us from error in matters of halal and haram.....End

[Ibrahim Ahmad @ChiefAhmad]

@alqary_emran We honor the classical Imams by understanding their METHODOLOGY, not just quoting their specific historical rulings. They taught us to identify 'ilal and apply them to new realities.....13