Is it permissible to adopt the view that prayer is not invalidated by the uncovering of what is other than the two private parts, so as not to have to make up past prayers in which the minor nakedness is thought to have been uncovered?

If the questioner is not among those capable of independent reasoning (ijtihad (definition)) and scholarly deduction (nazar), then he may adopt the view that the prayer of a man is valid even if a part of his awrah, other than the two private parts (al-saw'atayn), is uncovered. This is an authoritative opinion. Some scholars have stated that a common person (عامي) may adopt the opinion of a mufti (definition) even if it inclines away from another view. Others believe that he should follow what brings peace to his own heart. Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah was of the opinion that whoever omits a condition or pillar of prayer out of ignorance is not required to make up (qada') the prayer after gaining knowledge. As for the uncovering of the awrah, if it is not certain, then it holds no weight. It is permissible for a follower (muqallid) to deviate from acting upon the well-known (mashhur) opinion to a rare (shadh) one that contains a concession, without habitually seeking out concessions. Acting upon a less preferred (marjuh) opinion after an event has occurred and it is difficult to rectify, is something many scholars have permitted. However, if the questioner is among those capable of independent reasoning and scholarly deduction, then he is not permitted to follow (taqlid (definition)); rather, he must act upon what he finds to be supported by sound evidence.