The Concept of Followership (Ittiba’) in the Qur’an
By Adis Duderija, New Age Islam
18 November 2025
(content of this is based on this Ph.D thesis)
The idea of followership serves as the unseen engine driving human history, a force so fundamental that its significance often goes unexamined. Without individuals willing to follow—agreeing, complying, and aligning themselves behind others—no movement, whether constructive or destructive, could gain traction. Our inclination to delegate our judgment to others opens us to the heights of glory or the depths of disgrace that accompany followership. While it may seem straightforward to follow leaders, ideas, or traditions, the act of following, especially in the context of divine guidance, carries a profound and nuanced paradox.
The Paradox of Followership
A detailed examination of the concept of followership, or Ittiba’ in the Qur’an, reveals that it transcends mere submission; it introduces a fundamental tension for the individual. On one side, there is an invitation to embrace divine guidance, portrayed as clear and unequivocal. Conversely, the potential dangers of misguided followership loom large. Herein lies a paradox: every individual is held fully responsible and accountable for their actions, yet exists within an inescapable fabric of social interdependence. We are born into social contexts, and our lives unfold within interconnections with others. This social fabric does not absolve us of the burden of accountability but rather complicates it. Followership is presented as an act of will—a conscious choice to engage with what we choose to follow. From this act flows the weight of responsibility and accountability. Thus, the core challenge is to navigate our individual followership amidst the unavoidable realities of social dependency.
The Weight of Tradition
A significant factor influencing individual Ittiba’ is the authority of inherited knowledge and tradition—conceptually embodied in “the fathers.” This term extends beyond biological lineage to encompass the wisdom and practices passed down through generations. This formative influence is profound, shaping our values and identities. However, the discourse presents a crucial caution against uncritical adherence to these inherited ways. Numerous narratives illustrate individuals rejecting new guidance solely because it diverges from ancestral practices. The challenge remains: how can one trust what has been bequeathed when it may be based on ignorance or have diverged from truth over time?
This struggle between adhering to divine guidance and clinging to ancestral traditions resonates within legal and theological discussions about Taqlid. Originally meaning “imitation,” Taqlid evolved into a term denoting the acceptance of legal or religious opinions without demanding evidence. The metaphor here is striking: a practitioner of Taqlid resembles a camel whose reins are handed over to another, led wherever the leader desires. Although some interpretations eventually allowed limited room for Taqlid in practical matters for the uninformed, the overarching critique of blind adherence—especially in fundamental beliefs—remains robust. This critique parallels the caution against following ancestral traditions without critical discernment, emphasizing the need for independent thought and rational evaluation of the past. While tradition offers continuity, the individual is ultimately summoned to exercise judgment and intellect in response to revealed truth rather than merely adopting established practices out of obligation.
Power Dynamics and Moral Agency
Perhaps the most unsettling yet illuminating aspect of Ittiba’ as presented in the Qur’an lies in its intricate relationship with power, particularly the dynamics between the arrogant oppressors (al-Mustakbirun) and the perceived-weak oppressed (al-Mustad’afun). Initially, this dynamic appears straightforward—aligning with a moral stance that advocates for the vulnerable against an oppressive status quo. Indeed, many interpretations underscore the religious text’s commitment to empowering the marginalized and confronting those in power.
Yet, the inclusion of Ittiba’ complicates this binary. The text reveals instances where those identified as oppressed bear accountability for their plight, not in a victimized sense but because their followership contributed to sustaining the very oppression they endured. In a dramatic confrontation, the oppressed confront their erstwhile leaders, accusing them of leading them astray and ordering them to disbelieve. However, the reply redirects the responsibility back onto the followers, asserting, “No! You yourselves were sinners.”
This reframing fundamentally alters our understanding of oppression. While oppressors are indeed condemned for their arrogance and rejection of truth, the oppressed followers are held accountable for their choice to follow, their compliance, and their failure to uphold justice. This discourse doesn’t imply victim-blaming; instead, it underscores moral agency that persists even under duress. The capacity to choose whom to follow remains, and this choice carries significant moral implications. It indicates that states of weakness or strength, while influenced by external conditions, are also shaped by one’s allegiances. Individuals, even those in oppressive circumstances, bear responsibility for the paths they pursue—particularly when those paths involve obedience to injustice.
Individual Responsibility in a Social Context
The concept of Ittiba’, when viewed through the lens of these intricate relationships between tradition and oppression, continually circles back to the central paradox of individual accountability within a social construct. While we acknowledge the pressures exerted by ancestral ways and societal forces, the ultimate responsibility for beliefs and actions rests with the individual. Followership, therefore, is characterised in the Qur’an not as a passive state but as an active, voluntary offering. Thus, discerning whom or what to follow emerges as a critical moral act.
Conclusion
In summation, the exploration of Ittiba’ reveals a multifaceted and demanding understanding of the individual’s role in the world. It recognizes the profound effect of social influence and inherited tradition, while staunchly advocating for the principle of personal accountability. It challenges the comforting notion of ‘blind adherence’ to the past and disrupts simplistic narratives of victimhood by insisting on moral agency, even among the oppressed, particularly if their circumstances are sustained by their followership of injustice. Ultimately, the message resonates as a call for conscious, critical followership—one that is not driven by unthinking loyalty, inherited customs, or external pressures, but guided by independent judgment in response to divine guidance. This pursuit of balance between social existence and the weight of individual responsibility remains a perpetual tension, demanding diligence in every step we take.
-----
Adis Duderija is an Associate Professor in Islam and Society and Griffith University and a book series editor of a new book series on Islam and Process-Relational Thought (Routledge).
URL: https://www.newageislam.com/debating-islam/followership-ittiba-quran/d/137670
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism