Discussion of the difference between a pillar and a condition in prayer.

The Shaykh : The scholars have a concept called a pillar and a concept called a condition. In terms of the strength of the ruling, there is no difference between a condition and a pillar; because the absence of a condition from the conditions of prayer, or a pillar from the pillars of prayer, necessitates the invalidity of the prayer. From this perspective, both are the same. However, the difference in their view is that they say a condition is outside the prayer, such as wudu, and a pillar is inside the prayer, such as recitation, for example, or bowing and prostration. But when they discussed the takbir of ihram, they differed, saying: Is the takbir of ihram a condition or a pillar? What is the reason? Because it is before entering the prayer; so from one aspect it is a condition, and from another aspect it is a pillar. So you thought that it is a pillar according to one opinion. No, that is not how the matter is. The matter is that, considering it is connected to the prayer, it is a pillar, but considering that one has not yet entered the prayer, it is a condition. Once this detail from the scholars is known, we then say: It is true that this did not enter the prayer when he said: "I intend," and so on; so it is before the prayer. Likewise, the takbir of ihram is before the prayer. So is this takbir a pillar or a condition? This is a verbal discussion; because we said that in terms of the ruling, the result of a condition and a pillar is the same. If one leaves a condition, his prayer is invalid. If one leaves a pillar, his prayer is invalid.
So I return and say: Suppose, my brother, that the takbir of ihram is a pillar and not a condition; the hesitation we mentioned among the scholars is not important. The matter has become a verbal discussion, and this does not carry any importance. Let us withdraw; I will withdraw the word that they open the prayer with what? With this idle talk. What do you think if we said, instead of "they open," "they begin"? What? There is no difference between saying this or saying that. The whole goal is to clarify that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), when he stood up for prayer and wanted to enter the state of ihram for the prayer, did not say anything at all before the takbir of ihram. So the first thing with which he opens the prayer is: Allahu Akbar. So what is the grammatical status of this verbalization of the intention? It has no place in grammar; so it is a religious innovation. And here come all the hadiths regarding the condemnation of religious innovations.