Imam Ali's Silence after the Prophet's Departure From the Viewpoint of Hakim Termezi and Sayyid Heydar Amoli

Imamate and successorship to the Prophet has been the subject of theological disputes among the Shiites and Sunnites since long ago. Meanwhile, Imam Ali's silence in facing with Abu Bakr and his avoiding armed uprising are among reasons adduced to by the Sunnites in their arguments. In the third century AH, Hakim Termezi used the same reasoning to write a rejection to the Shiite view. He considered Imam Ali's silence as a sign for his consent and regarded his avoiding uprising – while enjoying power and bravery – as a sign for his legitimizing Abu Bakr's caliphate. After him, Sayyid Heydar Amoli, in the eight century, criticized Hakim Termezi's reasoning in a treatise. He used a theological approach to semantically investigate bravery and power and proved that Imam Ali' silence was not out of his consent. In the present article, the author reviews and investigates Hakim Termezi's claim and explains Sayyid Haydar's answer regarding the semantic study of bravery, valor, cowardice, power and inability. He reviews Hakim Termezi's argument in his treatise entitled al-Radd Ala-l-Rafiza, clarifying that Imam Ali's silence was not inconsistent with the principle of bravery and power.