سازوکار هدایت و ضلالت در قرآن کریم از منظر جامعه شناسی ارتباطات

Extended Abstract
 
Introduction and Objectives: The Holy Quran, as the final revealed divine scripture in Islam, serves as the principal source of guidance for humanity. Conceptually, it can be analyzed as a communication message in which God Almighty functions as the sender, the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) as the intermediary or messenger, and all human beings as the recipients. The ultimate objective of this divine message is to lead humanity toward the straight path of God, ensuring moral, spiritual, and social development. However, the reception of this message does not invariably result in guidance; individuals may encounter misguidance depending on the dynamics of the communication process. This perspective allows for the analysis of guidance and misguidance as a mechanism of communication, providing a sociological framework for understanding human interactions with the divine message.
In the field of sociology of communication, different theoretical schools offer varied emphases on the communication process. The process school, for example, highlights the centrality of the sender and the message itself, implying that the guidance or misguidance of individuals is predominantly determined by the qualities of the message and the sender’s intentions. Conversely, the semiotic school prioritizes the role of the audience, asserting that the meanings constructed by the recipients—shaped by their social, cultural, and psychological backgrounds—determine the effectiveness of communication. The Islamic school of communication, as discussed in contemporary scholarship, proposes an integrative approach, acknowledging that guidance or misguidance results from the interaction of four elements: the sender (God), the message (the Quran), the audience (human recipients), and the meaning that recipients ascribe to the message during interpretation.
The primary research question addressed in this study is whether guidance and misguidance are determined solely by God and the Quran, solely by the recipients of the message, or through an integrated mechanism in which both the divine sender and human recipients participate. To answer this question, the present study employed an archival research methodology, emphasizing textual analysis of the Quran, supplementary religious and Sufi literature, and academic studies on communication theories. Archival research is particularly suited for this topic, as written texts provide the most reliable sources for understanding both historical interpretations and contemporary analyses of Quranic guidance.
The study analyzed the Quranic text through the lens of three major communication schools: the process school, the semiotic school, and the Islamic school of communication. The analysis examined key themes regarding the mechanism of guidance (hidayah) and misguidance (dalalah) and sought to reconcile the interaction between the message, its sender, and its audience. The findings demonstrate that while the Quran constitutes a divine message aimed at leading humanity toward guidance, the mere existence of the message does not guarantee that all recipients will follow the straight path. Certain Quranic verses illustrate that the divine intention alone does not automatically ensure the guidance of individuals, emphasizing that human perception, interpretation, and context significantly influence the outcome.
The findings reveal that human recipients encounter the Quranic message uniquely, influenced by their social and cultural backgrounds, cognitive abilities, psychological states, and situational contexts. Each individual interprets the message differently, which may align or conflict with the intended guidance of the sender. This implies that the mechanism of guidance is neither unilateral nor absolute; instead, it is a complex interplay between divine intent, textual content, and human reception. Consequently, understanding misguidance requires examining not only the inherent qualities of the Quran and the divine intention but also the interpretive frameworks and lived experiences of the audience.
This study highlights that being a Muslim or simply being exposed to the Quranic message does not automatically result in guidance. Reliance on the Quran alone does not guarantee moral and spiritual alignment with divine objectives. As illustrated by the Hadith of Al-Thaqalayn and Quranic verses such as Surah Al-Kahf, verse 17, the Quranic text necessitates exposition and interpretation by qualified guides to facilitate proper understanding and practical application. These guides serve as intermediaries who interpret, contextualize, and transmit the intended meanings of the divine message, thereby enabling individuals to follow the path of guidance.
The research further demonstrates that guidance and misguidance cannot be fully explained by a single theoretical perspective. From the process school viewpoint, which emphasizes the sender and the message, a deterministic interpretation emerges, suggesting that God and the Quran alone are decisive in determining human guidance. This perspective, however, neglects the active role of human perception and interpretation. Conversely, the semiotic school, which foregrounds the recipient and the meanings they ascribe to the message, presents a delegation-based model in which guidance is entirely contingent upon individual and collective interpretations. While this perspective recognizes human agency, it risks diminishing the authority and intentionality of the divine sender.
The Islamic school of communication offers a balanced, integrative model that synthesizes elements of both determinism and delegation. This approach asserts that guidance or misguidance arises from a dynamic interaction among four components: God as the sender, the Quran as the message, the human recipients, and the meanings generated by those recipients in their interpretive engagement with the text. In this integrated framework, guidance is not automatic nor solely dependent on human effort; rather, it results from a synergy between divine intent and human reception. Misguidance occurs when this interaction is disrupted, either through misinterpretation, contextual misunderstandings, or neglect of the guidance provided by authoritative expositors.
The study emphasizes that social, cultural, and cognitive factors significantly shape the interpretive process. Recipients’ educational backgrounds, spiritual literacy, community norms, and situational experiences influence how they perceive, understand, and apply Quranic teachings. Therefore, effective guidance requires both the clarity of the message and the recipient’s preparedness to receive and act upon it. The interplay between these elements ensures that the Quran functions as a living text, capable of guiding diverse audiences across varying contexts.
Moreover, the research highlights the necessity of expositors, scholars, and community leaders in mediating the interaction between the Quranic message and its audience. These individuals facilitate the accurate transmission of meanings, clarify ambiguities, and contextualize guidance for contemporary realities. Without such mediation, recipients may misinterpret the message, resulting in unintended misguidance. This finding aligns with classical Islamic scholarship, which emphasizes the importance of interpretation (tafsir) and guidance (hidayah) in ensuring the efficacy of divine instruction.
In practical terms, the study proposes that any analysis of guidance and misguidance must account for the multifaceted communication process inherent in the Quranic framework. The sender, message, audience, and interpretive meaning all play indispensable roles. Neglecting any component leads to an incomplete understanding of how divine guidance operates in practice. Consequently, the Islamic school of communication provides the most comprehensive lens for examining this mechanism, integrating both divine determinism and human agency without disregarding either.
In conclusion, the findings of this study suggest that guidance in the Quran is not an automatic outcome of exposure to the divine text but a result of an interactive process involving multiple factors. The Quran, as a divine message, requires expositors and interpreters to mediate understanding. Human recipients, shaped by social, cultural, cognitive, and situational influences, actively participate in constructing meaning. Both the divine sender and the recipients’ interpretations are essential for achieving guidance, while misguidance arises from disruptions or misunderstandings within this communicative framework.
This study also underscores the inadequacy of relying solely on traditional communication schools—whether process or semiotic—when analyzing guidance and misguidance in the Quran. The Islamic school of communication, by integrating both message-centric and audience-centric perspectives, offers a holistic and culturally grounded framework for understanding the sociological dynamics of divine instruction. It respects the authority of God and the Quran while recognizing the interpretive role and social context of the recipients.
Overall, this research contributes to the sociology of communication by demonstrating that divine guidance operates as a complex, interactive process. It highlights the importance of integrating theological insights with sociological theories to explain human responses to sacred texts. By recognizing the interplay of sender, message, audience, and meaning, scholars can better understand the mechanisms of guidance and misguidance in Islamic societies, providing valuable insights for religious education, social behavior, and moral development.
Acknowledgment: The author expresses sincere gratitude to the editorial board, reviewers, and audiences of the Quarterly Journal of Islam and Social Sciences for their constructive feedback and support.
Conflict of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest in the research, writing, or publication of this article.
.