Likewise, ‘Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, would offer qunūt when news of the Muslim armies was slow to reach him. ‘Alī, may Allah be pleased with him, also offered qunūt when fighting opponents from among the Khawārij and others.

They said:

Discontinuing a practice does not constitute abrogation, for what abrogates must be incompatible with what it abrogates. If the Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, did something to meet a need and then discontinued it when that need ceased, this would not constitute abrogation. Indeed, even if he had discontinued it altogether, that would indicate that both performing it and omitting it were permissible, not that performing it was prohibited.

They said:

We know unequivocally that he did not offer qunūt as a regular practice, for there would have been ample motivation and reason to transmit such a practice. No Companion ever reported that, in his qunūt at Fajr or similar prayers, he supplicated except on behalf of some people or against others. Nor did any of them ever report that he regularly offered qunūt after bowing, or regularly supplicated in qunūt before bowing. More than one Companion rejected qunūt as a regular practice. Once this is understood, it becomes certain that no such regular practice existed, just as it is known that “Come to the best of deeds” was not part of the regular call to prayer. Rather, some Companions used it on particular occasions to urge people to pray.

This, then, is the most balanced view: qunūt is prescribed and has not been abrogated, but it is prescribed in response to a need that arises, not as a regular Sunnah practice. This is another principle concerning obligatory and recommended acts, comparable to the principle discussed earlier regarding what is waived on account of an excuse. For every regularly prescribed obligatory or recommended act