As for Imām Abū Ḥanīfah and a number of jurists, they sometimes give precedence to whichever description most plainly agrees with the Qur’ānic wording, and at other times they choose the report that has the larger body of transmitters.

Imām Aḥmad was questioned by his student al-Athram, who said: “I asked Abū ʿAbd Allāh, ‘Do you uphold all of the narrations, assigning each to its proper context, or do you select one of them?’ He replied, ‘I say that whoever follows all of them has done well. As for myself, I prefer the narration of Sahl.’”

Al-Ṣanʿānī commented, “Aḥmad’s answer is excellent, for all the descriptions are sound and the Prophet ﷺ practiced each of them.”

Ibn al-Qayyim, in Zād al-Hādī, authenticated six or seven distinct formats. He listed them in light of the enemy’s situation, and seems to favor applying all of them according to the varying states of warfare.

Al-Suhaylī states in his Rawḍ al-Anf: “The scholars have differed over which form to adopt. One group holds that the form most in keeping with the literal sense of the Qur’an should be followed. Another strives to determine the latest of the reports, regarding it as abrogating the others. A third group opt for the narration whose transmission is strongest. A fourth group practice all of them, adapting to the different circumstances of fear.” End of citation.

What Imām Aḥmad selected, Ibn al-Qayyim preferred, and al-Suhaylī mentioned is what the heart inclines toward: acting upon all the reports so as to facilitate matters for worshippers when the enemy’s condition changes. Allah knows best.

Points gleaned from the ḥadīth

1. It reaffirms the legitimacy of the fear prayer, underscores the importance of congregational prayer, and urges vigilance against the enemies of the religion.
2. Performing the prayer in this particular manner is appropriate when the enemy is not in the direction of the qiblah, just like the previous pattern; both occurred during the Expedition of Dhāt al-Riqāʿ, but at different times, hence the variation.
3. It differs from the normal prayer of safety in that the final rakʿah is lengthened beyond the first, and the followers who missed part of the prayer completed it before the imām’s taslīm.
4. It shows that a follower may separate from his imām for a valid excuse. Separation has been reported for matters less serious than this, such as the man who prayed behind Muʿādh; when Muʿādh lengthened his recitation, the man left the congregation and finished on his own because he had pressing needs, and the Prophet ﷺ did not instruct him to repeat the prayer.