Is covering the 'awrah (part of the body that must be covered) in prayer a condition or an obligation? And what is the ruling on one whose 'awrah is exposed due to ignorance?

The questioner : The question regarding the exposure of the 'awrah, O Shaykh, we wish to clarify whether it is a pillar or a condition. In this clarification, we say, for example, the first question: if a person knew that he was uncovered, or his 'awrah was exposed during the prayer, and this became apparent to him later, where he was alerted, does he repeat it if it is within the time of the prayer or outside its time? And if he was ignorant of the matter and the text reached him, what is the clarification in that, may Allah reward you with good?

The Shaykh : If he was ignorant of this reality, then his prayer is valid. But if it was negligence, if he did not know the ruling that the exposure of the 'awrah invalidates the prayer, we hope it was negligence. But if he knew and it occurred from him, as we see from some people who wear short shirts, so when they bow or prostrate, something of their backside or their 'awrah is exposed, then he should be ordered to repeat the prayer because he is negligent. As for what came within the question, whether it is an obligation or a condition, the truth is that there is little disagreement in this issue. The jurists of the four schools of jurisprudence and others hold that covering the 'awrah is among the conditions for the validity of the prayer. But some of the later scholars, such as al-Shawkani and al-Siddiq Hasan Khan and others, hold that it is an obligation and not a condition. My heart leans toward the statement of the Imams for two reasons. The first reason is that the command to cover the 'awrah in prayer seems to be specific to the etiquettes of prayer that relate to it due to its specificity. This is the first point. And secondly, there is his statement (peace and blessings be upon him) and the explicit statement of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) in this hadith that the prayer of a woman is not valid with her head uncovered contains an indication that covering the 'awrah is a condition in the prayer. Because we know that women are the counterparts of men, and any ruling that is valid or relates to men, its like relates to women, except what is excluded, and vice versa. So if a ruling comes specific to women, and in such a place as the head, which is not the major 'awrah, he says so it indicates that covering the 'awrah in general, like covering the head which is part of the 'awrah for a woman. Then this derivation is supported by a hadith in *Sahih al-Bukhari* The two shoulders of a man, by the consensus of the scholars, are not an 'awrah. So if the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) orders a man to cover in his prayer, as etiquette with his Lord, what is not an 'awrah, then it is even more so that he orders him to cover what is an 'awrah. And therefore, limiting oneself only to the statement that covering the 'awrah is an obligation and not a condition involves neglecting such a text and such a derivation.