All religions are not the same

We hear people blabbering this. I use the word blabbering, not because of getting carried away by my own biases. But I do so, because people use this phrase, "All religions are the same" either unconsciously or without rigorously going through the religious texts of different religions. That is why I used the word "blabbering". To understand why that isn't the case, we, for a moment, need to be objective and forget that we follow a certain religious system/faith system. All the religious practices or the faith systems/religions, were essentially man made. Our ego born out of our adherence to our faith may not let us accept it but that's the objective truth. But note that all these religions, were not born in the same geography. Atleast when we pit Santana Dharma or Hinduism, against Abrahamic faiths, that is pretty much a fact. These two religious systems were born in diffrent parts of the world, separated by thousands of miles. Thus they were not only product of different geographies but also the product of very different socio-politico-economic and environmental conditions. That's the first argument against any kind of alleged similarity between the messages brought to people by Indic faith systems and Abrahamic faith systems. How can two man made ideologies, which have different kinds of surrounding and surrounding conditions, give birth to same mindset, which should in turn give birth to same "divine message"? 

Let's take a look into my second argument. What is the common feature between Christianity and Islam? They are both the shows run by one single man. This makes them, what we can easily call, a 'top down model'. That means, one single person, claims to have a direct connection with divinity and thus claims sole authority on ultimate divine truth. Sanatana Dharma, as we see it today, on the other hand is born out of bottom up approach. Essentially it is democratization of access to divinity within the fold of a certain basic unwritten rules, including one that you'll not disturb the peace of others. While the on ground religio-cultural practices of classical Hinduism are actually the trickle down outcome of Darshana (philosophy), they always have the room to accommodate any regional practice in its fold as lokachar (लोकाचार). Not having a single person as "founder", enables these religious practices to be born out of common consensus and undergo a process of rationalization at individual levels. Of course, this facility of individual freedom comes with the condition that one will not try to disrupt others to maintain a general order. You may end up creating your own sect and go to masses and then leave it to them to decide whether they like your idea or not. When a faith is born out of the ideas of a single man, the claim to understand the divinity, eventually culminates into a supremacist mindset for the reason, that the person has "monopoly on the truth/divinity", atleast he claims so. Thus in turn, even the followers of that founder figure have the supremacist mindset because they associate themselves with monopoly on the truth as well. This mindset automatically renders the people who don't believe in "the message" as inferiors, leading to their dehumanisation first, and slaughter later, as the follower of such faith tends to see the world as two camps of believers and non believers. While on the other hand, people following a democratized faith, have a humble approach towards the understanding of divinity. Even when they feel that they know it, they choose to keep it to themselves and not thrust upon others. The faith systems which were born in harsh climatic conditions, or the societies which lacked natural resources, have an exploitative approach towards nature. To them, every other being, including animals, birds, trees, forests, etc. exist to remain subservient to their needs. While the faith systems, both in the lap of nature, have a mindset of समन्वय, i.e. living in harmony with nature and acting as a custodian/protector of it. No wonder, before laying the first stone of a building, Hindus conduct a bhoomi poojan, asking for forgiveness to mother Earth, and Christians call it "ground breaking ceremony" in which they are seen digging the Earth with a shovel, placing a feet on it (and nowadays clicking pictures of themselves along with).

The Abrahamic version of the ultimate creator/ultimate truth is essentially a jealous male God, who easily gets offended if you worship others or other entities along with him. While the Hindu understanding of the ultimate reality is that it is present in all forms throughout and if you sincerely focus, worship, be devoted to any one form, you'll end up reaching the ultimate. That again is a cause why a diverse spectrum of sects could easily coexist within the borders of this sacred geography called Bharat. 

I can go on and on, but those who are wise, will by now understand, All religions are not the same.

Anyone who says that they are same or have similar message, creates confusion among Hindu masses and is misguiding them in the circumstances when they need to have an understanding of a distinct unique identity to further the process of social militarisation. And he is thy enemy.