What do you think?
Rate this book
All Religions Are Not The Same
Sanjay Dixit is becoming one of the most important intellectual and media voices in India today. What is most notable about his current book All Religions Are Not the Same is the systematic, rational, experiential and concise manner in which he explains the many notable differences between religions. This extends to how different religions look at the human being, society, knowledge, the nature of the universe and the true goal of life. His book is not the product of emotion or political posturing, but arises from well thought out clarity and discernment. He is not promoting any platitudes, bowing down to any faith, or ignoring major distinctions between religions so as not to offend anyone. He reveals the fundamental differences between religions on the inner and the outer, the individual and the collective, at human and cosmic levels, much like a scientific discourse. He presents Hinduism and Sanatana Dharma in its own right, not according to a monotheistic terminology using inappropriate Abrahamic concepts. He shows how Sanatana Dharma forms a complete system of universal knowledge, not requiring the approval of contrary religions for it to be socially, scientifically or spiritually valid.
194 pages, Kindle Edition
Published February 26, 2024
47 people are currently reading
116 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews
March 5, 2024
I found the book quite insightful and informative. It is certainly addressed to the lay reader not to the scholar. English is simple. After reading this book, one should be convinced that all religions are not the same. Sanatana dharma stands apart as it does not say that it has an open architecture with a free choice available to every sadhak.
May 22, 2024
had low expectation but it turn out to be a good one. covers a lot of ground, shows differences in theology, metaphysics, tolerance, history, sociology, agenda. A must read for Hindu Dhimmis.
December 5, 2024
This book does a good job of comparing different religions and I learned a lot from it. However, I don't agree with how the author portrays Arya Samaj. Arya Samaj is not similar to Abrahamic religions simply because they don't believe in murti pooja. They follow the Vedas,Upanishads and believe in a formless God, so what’s the problem? They have consistently worked to protect both our dharm and our nation, unlike those who have only recently become active. Many freedom fighters came from Arya Samaj. The Vedas are our dharmic foundations, and they honor them. If the author wanted to highlight a group that diverges from traditional beliefs, perhaps he should have considered ISKCON, which promotes the idea of "demi-gods" and does not recognize other deities as capable of granting moksha. They may be more aligned with Abrahamic views, unlike any other dharmic organization,yet even ISKCON has some good deeds that align with dharmic values rather than Abrahamic ones.
February 5, 2024
Sanjay Dixit's "All Religions are not the Same" meticulously dissects various religions, providing a systematic, rational, and experiential exploration of their differences. His approach, devoid of emotional bias or political posturing, demonstrates a profound clarity and discernment.
Dixit diverges from promoting platitudes or avoiding offense; instead, he fearlessly exposes fundamental disparities between religions at individual, collective, human, and cosmic levels. The book's foundation lies in a scientific discourse, offering a refreshing departure from mere rhetoric.
By presenting Hinduism and Sanatana Dharma on their own terms, Dixit rejects monotheistic terminology and inappropriate Abrahamic concepts. This distinction highlights how Sanatana Dharma constitutes a comprehensive system of universal knowledge, self-sufficient and not reliant on the approval of contrary religions for its social, scientific, or spiritual validity.
In essence, Dixit's work stands as a beacon of intellectual rigor, challenging readers to engage in a nuanced exploration of diverse belief systems without succumbing to oversimplified narratives.
🌟🌟🌟🌟
Dixit diverges from promoting platitudes or avoiding offense; instead, he fearlessly exposes fundamental disparities between religions at individual, collective, human, and cosmic levels. The book's foundation lies in a scientific discourse, offering a refreshing departure from mere rhetoric.
By presenting Hinduism and Sanatana Dharma on their own terms, Dixit rejects monotheistic terminology and inappropriate Abrahamic concepts. This distinction highlights how Sanatana Dharma constitutes a comprehensive system of universal knowledge, self-sufficient and not reliant on the approval of contrary religions for its social, scientific, or spiritual validity.
In essence, Dixit's work stands as a beacon of intellectual rigor, challenging readers to engage in a nuanced exploration of diverse belief systems without succumbing to oversimplified narratives.
🌟🌟🌟🌟
March 20, 2024
Let me start by saying this book is not that good. That's why I gave it two out of five. Why review it then if it is so awful? Well, I guess because, despite its deficiencies, I learnt something from it. Quite a lot in fact. Indeed, for someone who is interested in interfaith in the 21st century, I might even go so far as to call it a must-read text.
Ok, so what is so bad about it? Well, put simply, it does not do what it states on the cover.
“This book is not the product of emotion or political posturing, but arises from well thought out clarity and discernments. He is not promoting any platitudes, bowing down to any faith, or ignoring major distinctions between religions so as not to offend anyone.”
That is what the back cover declares, and it is all completely untrue. Dixit’s book is emotional, he clearly has a political position which he pushes, and it is not always well thought out. Furthermore, he does ignore distinctions between religions… well, some of them.
Let me explain…
Dixit is a Hindu, and the aim of his book is clear: to prove how Hinduism and Sanatana Dharma is quite different to the monotheistic Abrahamic traditions. This aim is laudable, and he does it well in places. However, there are two main areas where he falls down.
Firstly, whilst he understands his own faith well, he seems to resort to crude stereotypes when discussing other religions. The binary monotheistic Christianity and Islam that he presents may be true in case of some Evangelical groups or Wahabis, but they read like tasteless parodies of some of the rich traditions like Orthodoxy or Sufism. He denies that a mysticism exists in the Abrahamic tradition despite ample evidence of it in all three of the main branches of the Abrahamic tree.
Conversely, when it comes to the Sanatana Dharma traditions, Dixit seems confused. What he talks about is Hinduism. Buddhism is presented as a (somewhat lesser) wing of the faith. As for Sikhism, he doesn’t know what to do about it so he says very little.
In short, what this book should be called is ‘The Abrahamic Faiths are not the same as Hinduism’. Not as catchy maybe, but much more accurate.
So, why is it worth reading the book then? Well, because it is timely. Some of the things that Dixit rails against are genuine. Colonialism has had an impact on how religions are categorised and presented, and interfaith efforts are traditionally Abrahamically-inspired and led, aiming to view all traditions through a monotheistic lens. For the first time in modern history, the Hindus — and others — are beginning to speak with a voice of their own, presenting their own tradition rather than having Westerners do it for them.
And this is good. Liberation begins by having your own voice.
And in that respect, Dixit hits upon some striking truths. His assertion that Hinduism is, in essence, an experiential framework that creates a knowledge system as opposed to the Abrahamic beliefs which produce a belief system; that the former is descriptive and the latter prescriptive, contain much truth. It sometimes takes an outsider to diagnose the disease in your own body and he does that well with regards to monotheism. His book made me think and it is timely because, in India today, voices like Dixit’s are gaining in influence and prominence.
But that doesn’t mean they are right. He may diagnose the faults of the Abrahamic traditions well, but he over-generalises and, with regards to his own tradition, he seems oblivious to his own biases. In the chapter ‘Hindutva vs Hinduism Debate’ he throws all pretence at scholarship and balance to one side and descends into a rant, citing conspiracy theories and launching a cruel and inaccurate attack on perhaps the greatest Hindu of the modern age, the Mahatma Gandhi.
“Gandhi’s ahimsa is completely flawed… Gandhi was always plagued by this ego. This was his failing and he took his followers down with it. It resulted in the partition of India. Ironically, his policy of ahimsa brought untold misery and bloodshed for millions. His followers were the ones who got hit the most. They lost everything — a part of the country, millions of fellow Hindus, and their pride as well. To add to the stupidity, he retained those very same people who had caused this denouement.”
The assertions are staggering. Gandhi had many flaws — few would reckon him a first-rate economist for example — but an excess of ego was not one. The courage of a man prepared to fast unto death is lambasted and he is blamed for the very things he sought to avoid. The partition was not Gandhi’s fault, but that of the Muslim League, Hindu extremists like the Hindutvas that Dixit lauds and the British. Gandhi’s non-violence did not lose everything: it defeated the greatest empire on earth at the time and created the largest democracy on the planet, a multi-ethic, multi-faith country that has survived up until the present-day.
The irony is that Dixit rages about Abrahamic monotheism, stating its inferiority to Hinduism because it is “binary” and tribal and yet, when discussing his own tradition, he becomes indistinguishable from the binary monotheists that he hates.
His book should read as a lesson to us all.
Review originally published here: https://medium.com/@mattpointon/book-...
Ok, so what is so bad about it? Well, put simply, it does not do what it states on the cover.
“This book is not the product of emotion or political posturing, but arises from well thought out clarity and discernments. He is not promoting any platitudes, bowing down to any faith, or ignoring major distinctions between religions so as not to offend anyone.”
That is what the back cover declares, and it is all completely untrue. Dixit’s book is emotional, he clearly has a political position which he pushes, and it is not always well thought out. Furthermore, he does ignore distinctions between religions… well, some of them.
Let me explain…
Dixit is a Hindu, and the aim of his book is clear: to prove how Hinduism and Sanatana Dharma is quite different to the monotheistic Abrahamic traditions. This aim is laudable, and he does it well in places. However, there are two main areas where he falls down.
Firstly, whilst he understands his own faith well, he seems to resort to crude stereotypes when discussing other religions. The binary monotheistic Christianity and Islam that he presents may be true in case of some Evangelical groups or Wahabis, but they read like tasteless parodies of some of the rich traditions like Orthodoxy or Sufism. He denies that a mysticism exists in the Abrahamic tradition despite ample evidence of it in all three of the main branches of the Abrahamic tree.
Conversely, when it comes to the Sanatana Dharma traditions, Dixit seems confused. What he talks about is Hinduism. Buddhism is presented as a (somewhat lesser) wing of the faith. As for Sikhism, he doesn’t know what to do about it so he says very little.
In short, what this book should be called is ‘The Abrahamic Faiths are not the same as Hinduism’. Not as catchy maybe, but much more accurate.
So, why is it worth reading the book then? Well, because it is timely. Some of the things that Dixit rails against are genuine. Colonialism has had an impact on how religions are categorised and presented, and interfaith efforts are traditionally Abrahamically-inspired and led, aiming to view all traditions through a monotheistic lens. For the first time in modern history, the Hindus — and others — are beginning to speak with a voice of their own, presenting their own tradition rather than having Westerners do it for them.
And this is good. Liberation begins by having your own voice.
And in that respect, Dixit hits upon some striking truths. His assertion that Hinduism is, in essence, an experiential framework that creates a knowledge system as opposed to the Abrahamic beliefs which produce a belief system; that the former is descriptive and the latter prescriptive, contain much truth. It sometimes takes an outsider to diagnose the disease in your own body and he does that well with regards to monotheism. His book made me think and it is timely because, in India today, voices like Dixit’s are gaining in influence and prominence.
But that doesn’t mean they are right. He may diagnose the faults of the Abrahamic traditions well, but he over-generalises and, with regards to his own tradition, he seems oblivious to his own biases. In the chapter ‘Hindutva vs Hinduism Debate’ he throws all pretence at scholarship and balance to one side and descends into a rant, citing conspiracy theories and launching a cruel and inaccurate attack on perhaps the greatest Hindu of the modern age, the Mahatma Gandhi.
“Gandhi’s ahimsa is completely flawed… Gandhi was always plagued by this ego. This was his failing and he took his followers down with it. It resulted in the partition of India. Ironically, his policy of ahimsa brought untold misery and bloodshed for millions. His followers were the ones who got hit the most. They lost everything — a part of the country, millions of fellow Hindus, and their pride as well. To add to the stupidity, he retained those very same people who had caused this denouement.”
The assertions are staggering. Gandhi had many flaws — few would reckon him a first-rate economist for example — but an excess of ego was not one. The courage of a man prepared to fast unto death is lambasted and he is blamed for the very things he sought to avoid. The partition was not Gandhi’s fault, but that of the Muslim League, Hindu extremists like the Hindutvas that Dixit lauds and the British. Gandhi’s non-violence did not lose everything: it defeated the greatest empire on earth at the time and created the largest democracy on the planet, a multi-ethic, multi-faith country that has survived up until the present-day.
The irony is that Dixit rages about Abrahamic monotheism, stating its inferiority to Hinduism because it is “binary” and tribal and yet, when discussing his own tradition, he becomes indistinguishable from the binary monotheists that he hates.
His book should read as a lesson to us all.
Review originally published here: https://medium.com/@mattpointon/book-...
March 27, 2024
'ekaṃ sad viprā bahudhā vadanti'/‘God is one but intellects call it many’ is deeply ingrained in Hindu minds, leading to the misconception that all religions including non-Eastern ones, resemble their own. This book
“All religion are not same”
challenges this notion, aiming to correct deluded Hindus. Through this book, Dixit not only challenges the prevalent notion of religious equivalency but argues that each faith system carries its distinct worldview, principles, and implications for societal structures.
Dixit distinguishes between 'Belief Systems' (e.g., Abrahamic faiths, Zoroastrianism, Mandaeism) which believe in their book, their Prophets & their God with 'Inquiry Systems' (e.g., Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Shintoism) which prioritize experiential exploration over dogmatic adherence to scripture.
“This book tries to first define the frameworks, & then uses certain principles like the Scientific method, Time concepts, Logic concepts, Cosmology, Epistemology and Eschatology and finds out that the two basic frameworks differ from each other in every respect.
Secondly, the book looks at the nuances of these different faiths in their basic philosophies/theologies, & how they developed over thousands of years & tries to grapple with the inadequacies of the western point of view in the way it looks at Nature-based religions.
Towards the end, the book traces the outcomes of the belief systems, & how they interacted with similar faiths, and dissimilar faiths”(Loc: 279-285)
While this book presents a compelling argument against the homogenization of religious traditions, it also invites readers to critically examine their own perspectives & biases. “The book is largely a description of facts as they stand.…the outcomes of a philosophy are important indicators. These can lead to a whole range of analyses of complex human behavior as a function of religious beliefs”(Loc:2348-2351) Author through this book concludes “Violence comes naturally to ‘Only God’ (‘belief systems’) religions, who are not loathe to impose their worldview on others. The meditative nature of the inquiry system religions on the other hand, is naturally more accommodative”(Loc:2364-2365)
In conclusion, "All Religions Are Not Same" is a compelling treatise that challenges conventional wisdom & invites readers to reconsider their perceptions of religious diversity. Through its scholarly analysis and compelling narrative, Sanjay Dixit illuminates the profound disparities between these paradigms, enriching our understanding of religious diversity and fostering nuanced interfaith dialogue.
Dixit distinguishes between 'Belief Systems' (e.g., Abrahamic faiths, Zoroastrianism, Mandaeism) which believe in their book, their Prophets & their God with 'Inquiry Systems' (e.g., Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Shintoism) which prioritize experiential exploration over dogmatic adherence to scripture.
“This book tries to first define the frameworks, & then uses certain principles like the Scientific method, Time concepts, Logic concepts, Cosmology, Epistemology and Eschatology and finds out that the two basic frameworks differ from each other in every respect.
Secondly, the book looks at the nuances of these different faiths in their basic philosophies/theologies, & how they developed over thousands of years & tries to grapple with the inadequacies of the western point of view in the way it looks at Nature-based religions.
Towards the end, the book traces the outcomes of the belief systems, & how they interacted with similar faiths, and dissimilar faiths”(Loc: 279-285)
While this book presents a compelling argument against the homogenization of religious traditions, it also invites readers to critically examine their own perspectives & biases. “The book is largely a description of facts as they stand.…the outcomes of a philosophy are important indicators. These can lead to a whole range of analyses of complex human behavior as a function of religious beliefs”(Loc:2348-2351) Author through this book concludes “Violence comes naturally to ‘Only God’ (‘belief systems’) religions, who are not loathe to impose their worldview on others. The meditative nature of the inquiry system religions on the other hand, is naturally more accommodative”(Loc:2364-2365)
In conclusion, "All Religions Are Not Same" is a compelling treatise that challenges conventional wisdom & invites readers to reconsider their perceptions of religious diversity. Through its scholarly analysis and compelling narrative, Sanjay Dixit illuminates the profound disparities between these paradigms, enriching our understanding of religious diversity and fostering nuanced interfaith dialogue.
October 4, 2024
This is a terrifying book. Yet, a much needed one, to be read by all those believe in the decency of co-existence. It is well researched and factually presented. Sanjay Dixit has gone about his reasoming in an admirably unapologetic, courageous and extremely professional manner. If it stings the so-called rationalists, it would not be surprising at all! But it is indeed a wake-up call for all those who believe in the equality of humankind - that every religion has as much right as any other to exist. That every religion is equally important as any other. That we all need to co-exist and let people follow whatever religion thay want to practice. Claiming that any one religion or their god is superior to others may be a personal matter of belief. But to try and impose such views on others is a contemptible crime and should be put down. Forcing people of any one faith to another is immoral. Violence as a means of achieving religious supremacy is the basest of behaviour and is totally despicable.
January 4, 2024
Wonderful book to read , I think before reading any scriptures of any religion, We need to read know what is the difference between all the religion , Basic of Religion , Practice , Tradition and customs
June 3, 2024
To be honest some of it went over my head. But a good read to try and understand Sanatana. Also some history on religion is covered. Overall a very basic intro into comparative religion.
Wish the cover art had been more attractive. Hope they will change it in future editions.
Wish the cover art had been more attractive. Hope they will change it in future editions.
Read
January 8, 2024Informative
June 8, 2024
Must read for only human beings, who want to learn the truth of dharma and have hope for cosmos
August 28, 2024
Great book for folks who think that all religions are the same. 😂 If this does not clarify their doubts then nothing else will.
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews