Abstract The phenomenon of takfir has, in recent decades, transcended the realm of doctrinal judgment and, in conjunction with organized violence, emerged as one of the most significant sources of crisis and instability in the Muslim world. Employing a descriptive-analytical method and drawing upon library-based research, this study first defines the Takfiri movement as an ideological formation that, through the unwarranted expansion of the boundaries of unbelief (kufr), transforms intra-Islamic differences into matters of faith and unbelief and utilizes takfir as an instrument of social exclusion and the legitimization of violence. It then examines two dimensions of the incompatibility between this logic and the model of the Islamic Revolution of Iran: incompatibility at the epistemological-methodological level (the understanding of tawhid and shirk, methods of textual interpretation, and the relationship between sectarian differences and judgments of unbelief) and at the socio-political level (the unity of the Muslim ummah, public security, and the consequences of civil war). The study then reviews the historical trajectory of takfir from the Kharijites to its contemporary manifestations and demonstrates that, in the modern period, Salafi-jihadist movements, through transnational networking and maximalist forms of takfir, have created the conditions for more extensive crises. The central focus of the article is a re-examination of Ayatollah Ja'far Sobhani's critiques of Wahhabism and the socio-political consequences of takfir, including his criticism of the unwarranted expansion of the concept of shirk, his warnings against sectarian conflict and intra-Muslim bloodshed, and his emphasis on religious rationality, scholarly dialogue, and the shared foundations of the Muslim ummah. The findings indicate that Takfiri logic is incompatible with the ideals of the Islamic Revolution—particularly Islamic unity, human dignity, and resistance to domination—and that containing extremism requires a combination of epistemological critique, sound religious education, and integrative policies.