Those who take to guns could do so due to deprivation, suppression, or historical legacy. The Afghans have lived through violence for centuries, by the Mughals, the Russians, their own people, so they have always had to fight for freedom... we cannot take away the context. But they legitimised it by using jihad, a religious sanction, so they could be seen as mujahids, fighting for Allah. And you cannot say there is nothing concrete.

Religion helps you relate with the universe. Buddha was indifferent to the concept of god yet he gave us values.

Jihad is nothing but making efforts to realise goodness in life.

Real 'imaan' is faith in humanity, so those who deny goodness are kafirs.

I am not an individualist in the Western sense. Collectivism can become oppressive when it tries to dictate; the rights of the two should not clash.

I was told by my father, who was a priest, that it was the basic duty of a Muslim to establish peace on earth... I soon came to the conclusion that it was not religion but misuse of religion and politicising of religion, which was the main culprit.

The individual cannot exist on his/her own and the collectivism should respect freedom of conscience. My struggle is about the freedom of thought.