Hinduism update

It seems that Buddhism had the following doctrines which were not that prevalent in Hinduism earlier:

significance of ahimsa

construction of huge temples as a place which can be used in a multi-purpose way (including for social events: earlier people prayed only to Indra and others, not particularly in temples)

sponsorship of religion by Kings in some form.

Hinduism followed by

adopting the tenet "Ahimsa Paramo Dharma", by stopping of sacrifices

adopting Buddha as an avatar of Vishnu: someone who can show a way to truth.

building huge temples for Hindu gods (it seems the parctice was not there earlier).

doing a state sponsorship of religion, the main examples being by south indian kings like Raja-Raja-the-great.

The result was there was no Buddhism "left" (if there was such a description), as it had nothing new to offer!! This was the way in which Hinduism assimilated Buddhism.
--
The question of relevance is, suppose Hinduism is threatened by Christianity or Islam in some way, can it save itself in the same way by assimilating it? i.e., 1000 years down the line, do we have

prayers to Christ and Muhammad as prophets.

some kind of acceptance that we are imperfect(other schools in Hinduism can continue to believe the vedantic way of perfectness).

make piligrimage to mecca as a reasonably mandatory one (in hinduism, people can do piligrimages to wherever and as and they want to).

Truly, I am not opposed to any of the above. Though I can think of some ways in which the assimilation could go in a direction that I may not want. What if such a thing happens? What direction could be a dangerous one?