Is Islam Necessarily, Inherently Violent?

Especially since 9/11, there has been a lot of discussion regarding the very nature of Islam, particularly in relation to violence. Increasingly, there have been incidents of violent, mob reactions to perceived slurs or negative comments about Islam or especially Islam's founder, and correspondingly a response, particularly from the West, questioning if this does not illustrate the inherent intolerance and violence of Islam as a faith. Does not the Qur'an not say, in the often-quoted Sura 9:5 (Sura At-Tawba):

"But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful."

On the surface of it, it could seem that this would be an apologetic for forcible conversion, and in fact it has been used as justification for forcible conversion at times. The question, though, is whether this is how this verse is interpreted by scholars within the context of Islam. Are there voices within Islam itself which seem to disavow such violence? To be sure, one increasingly comes across writing in the Western press discussing how Muslims must be made "to embrace secular modernity". This seems reasonable on the surface, if one regards a modern or even postmodern worldview as that which will ultimately lead to world peace and harmony. To many Muslims, however, this would come as something of a call to apostasy, to an abandoning of what Muslims, at least, perceive as a revelation from Heaven. Thi was discussed in a recent article by Ted Olsen in which he noted that when Western writers say that Islam needs its own "Reformation" and a "Muslim Martin Luther" to lead it,

"Actually, the pundits' description of what this reformer would do suggest that they're more interested in a Muslim John Shelby Spong than a Luther: someone who would dismiss the Qur'an as unscientific silliness and bring Islam in line with Enlightenment values." (Ted Olsen, "Does Islam Need a Luther or a Pope?", Christianity Today, November 2006, , accessed 24 October 2006)

The question then, is whether there is would be considered an Islamically faithful counter to the Islamist interpretations of passages such as these.

On a recent visit to Southeast Asia, I happened to pick up a slim volume which is an example of what I have looked for in this. In searching for a link for it, I came to discover that it is online: Defending The Transgressed By Censuring The Reckless Against The Killing Of Civilians, by Oxford-based Malaysian Shaykh Muhammad Afifi al-Akiti is a fatwa, that is, a religious judgment or opinion which takes to task specifically Islamist interpretations of quranic passages such as this one, in what is meant to be a clear-headed critique of terrorism in general and suicide bombing in particular from an theological, Islamic perspective. This has been positively received by other Muslim writers such as Dr. Hisham al-Zoubeir and H.A. Hellyer, who take essentially the same position. It is especially interesting that while al-Akiti could not on any level pro-Israel (note his reference to the "disasters of 1948 and 1967), he nonetheless has the considerable courage to address the issue of suicide bombing anywhere, against anyone, including Israeli civilians.

While this doesn't remove the importance of arguments regarding, for example, treatment of non-Muslims in Muslim-ruled lands as dhimmis (please note that the preceding link is to a PDF document) as has been noted in the preceding article and other writings by, for example, Bat Ye'or, I believe approaches such as that being pioneered by Sheikh al-Akiti give hope that within the house of Islam itself, voices will begin to be heard calling for peace.