This research provides a comparative analysis of the Islamic Revolution in Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, focusing on their objectives, tools, and strategies for achieving political power. The findings indicate that while both movements share macro-objectives, they exhibit significant differences at the levels of operational goals, tools, and strategies. The Islamic Revolution in Iran formulated its goals in terms of a fundamental transformation of the existing political order and the establishment of a religious government. By relying on religious leadership, mass popular mobilization, socio-religious networks, and revolutionary discourse, it succeeded in seizing political power and transforming it into sustainable institutionalization.In contrast, the Muslim Brotherhood, at least during its initial formation,pursued its Islamic goals not through a revolutionary break from the existing order, but within the framework of a gradual redefinition of the relationship between religion and state, institutional reform, and conditional adaptation to the rules of the modern state. By utilizing party activities, electoral competition, and socio-educational networks, the movement sought to approach power through the accumulation of social capital and gradual influence within formal structures. However, its dependence on political opportunities, pressure from authoritarian structures, and the lack of capacity for institutional stabilization limited its strategy to reformist and participatory activism. Nevertheless, the thought of Sayyid Qutb, which became increasingly radicalized during his time in prison, envisioned, at least at a theoretical level,fundamental changes to political systems, not only in Egypt but globally.