[mudozvonf]

It's amusing how some of SHY's tangential statements are used to extrapolate his ultimate aqeedah, yet when he states is aqeedah in clear terms its brushed off as 'diplomatic statements'. Of course his ambiguous statements serve one's cause and agenda much better than his clear ones.

What cause do his ambiguous statements serve? Do they serve the perennialists when they pounce on his words and say 'Look, SHY said this' and then mislead others? Do they serve the modernists who say 'Look, SHY says this' and then they use these statements to mislead others? Even his statement on apostasy is ambiguously worded... we don't whether the thinks it's obligatory to apply the hadd or not, he just mentioned it 'could be strongly argued that...' which is problematic since we'll get a bunch of people (modernists) who start denying all the hadd punishments in a manner similar to Tariq Ramadan who says 'they make us look bad, lets not use them for a while'. His ambiguous statements are the SOURCE of fitnah... he says things that sound like one thing when he means the total opposite and those who are unaware of his real stances fall hook line and sinker into deviance.