That is a perennial problem which also lay at the heart of the taqleed-shakhsi for aami discussions (see the fiqh section). To me it resembles the chicken and egg problem. In theory, everyone is obligated to know the daruriyaat-al-deen with a few exceptions (like new Muslims, remote settlements etc.) - but even they are obligated to not deny a daruri aspect when it reaches them (vide Imam Nawawi et al.). Further, if I remember correctly, Imam Ghazzali has ruled that people are also obligated to learn about the regional heresies of their respective localities - so that they can protect themselves when they come across them. So, in principle, a person will be at-least a sinner for not acquiring this knowledge. Now, if a layperson approaches a scholar to learn about this - isn't it the duty of the scholar to teach him? Rather than saying: you don't need to know. do what you like. It's not how that layman came to you, or whether he considers you a sunni or not, the very fact that you find him at your doorstep with such a clear question as this makes you culpable for not sharing your knowledge. You see, the answers do not revolve around the commoner but the scholar who, as per them, has no grounds for keeping him in the dark. Hence, the Muftiyan's umbrage at Mawlana Zayd for wishing to keep things in wraps, and telling people that they are not even mukallaf. Now this is all theory, and I concede that it's application is not so straightforward. For one, the world having become connected, heresies don't stay put within geographic limits... ofc, one must use hikmah and patience when dealing with people who are spoilt for choice and probably do not bring sufficient interest to the table to allow you to complete your da'wah. People don't become wahabis overnight, so why should we expect them to identify with the Sunni narrative in 2 minutes? But between hikmah and kitmaan-al-Ilm is a fine line, which sh. Asrar tried to navigate and drew the ire of his colleagues. Allah knows best.