Is it permissible to adopt the view of some of Malik's companions that covering the 'awrah is obligatory but not a condition [for the validity of prayer], and that prayer performed while it is uncovered is valid, whether intentionally or inadvertently, and if one were to adopt this view, would only repentance be required, or also a repetition [of the prayer]?

Maliki jurists differed regarding the ruling on covering the 'awrah (private parts) for prayer: whether it is a condition for the validity of prayer or a duty that is not a condition. Based on this, it is permissible for a person afflicted with waswasah (obsessive doubts) to adopt the easier opinion. Consequently, there is no need to repeat prayers previously performed with the 'awrah uncovered. Instead, one should repent for uncovering the 'awrah, as its covering is a duty upon which there is consensus. However, if the 'awrah was uncovered due to ignorance or inability, then there is no sin at all.