What is required, then, is that none of these forms be considered superior to another without evidence from Islamic law. The mere selection of one form because performing the act of worship requires a choice must not be treated as grounds for its superiority. If Allah obliges me to free a slave or perform a congregational prayer, this necessarily requires me to free a particular slave and pray with a particular congregation. Neither need be better than another; indeed, neither may be superior in any respect. Their merit must therefore be examined separately.

Even if the religious evidence establishes that one form is superior, someone who practises a permissible alternative must not be censured, nor should others be turned against him on that account. Nor should its superiority be exaggerated beyond the degree assigned to it by Islamic law, for the difference in merit may be slight.

There is, however, a related question: whether these forms are equal in merit or some are superior, is it better for a person to adhere consistently to one form, or to practise one sometimes and another at other times, as the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, used to do? Some people consistently practise one form out of preference or a belief that it is superior, and consider their constant adherence to that form better. For most, however, such consistency stems from habit and conformity to the habits of their companions and those who follow their way, rather than a belief in its superiority.

The correct view is this:

Varying one’s practice in this way, following the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace—for this entails adherence to the Sunnah and the community, reviving his Sunnah, uniting the hearts of the Muslim community, and benefiting from the distinctive quality of each form—is better than consistently practising a particular form to which the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, did not consistently adhere, for several reasons: