The article reads okay-ish but since it is posted on controversial thread; I feel the write is novice about the religion as a whole and wonders how the editors let him print those novice claims. Plus, I am not sure about if he is talking about legit religion or religious texts (prolly some human wrote for his/her benefits)
Comparing three major core he pointed out:
Core 1: Hindus or Jains or Buddhists don’t go around the world trying to convert people from other religions
--> mainly because there weren't massive competition (like between Muslim and christian) to start with. Plus, didn't Buddhist/Jains went to tons of place to "spread" their knowledge.
Core 2: In Hinduism, the path to moksha is not that easy
--> Bruh, read some Hindu religious text. If you die on certain religious date, or say some god's name at your last breath; you get mukti.
Core 3:principle of Hinduism is the idea of God’s omnipresence
--> We only celebrate animals/trees/even rivers if they are mentioned as a god in our religious text, if not, we don't eg: cats (especially black cats).