Is the husband considered to have abandoned prayer for the past 25 years based on his incorrect understanding of intention, and does this necessitate the renewal of the marriage contract?

The marriage of the questioner is valid, and there is no need to renew it. Her husband is not considered a disbeliever for abandoning prayer, because his actions — his presumed abandonment of the obligatory intention — stemmed from his ignorance of the ruling. The correct opinion is that the intention may precede the act of worship by a short time. Some scholars even hold that it may precede it by a long time as long as it is not nullified. According to these scholars, it is sufficient for one to intend the prayer upon leaving their home. There is no harm in adopting this opinion if the matter has already occurred and passed, although it is more prudent to make the intention at the time considered valid by most scholars, which is at the beginning of the act of worship or shortly before it, as conventionally understood. Therefore, nothing is incumbent upon the husband for what has passed. For the future, he must make the intention at the time we have clarified, so that his responsibility is discharged with certainty. As for specifying the intention for prayer, some scholars hold that it is not a condition, and it is sufficient to intend the obligatory prayer of the time. However, it is more prudent to be keen on specifying the intended prayer to avoid disagreement.