As to Hinduism, see the example of India today. Specifically, the Hindutva movement, which is often considered fascist, or at least fascist-adjacent.

Mostly the war and genocide.

The caste system of hinduism has been long used to sanctify oppresion, hindu nationalism (hindutva) is a potent force promoting authoritarianism and distruth (indus valley civ was def. not vedic nor did they have flight).

Buddhism has been used as an imperial religion less easily, but chinese dynasties have done it. In india, ashoka the great (or the terrible) probably used it as a cynical PR campaign after his empire recoiled at his brutality. In the province he most brutalised, the version of the stele that talks about his terrible deeds and his conversion leaves out the conversion and just reminds reader of his brutality.

Daoism is a bit different because it has an explicitly anarchist strain that's harder to co-opt by the powerful. Bits of Laozi are directed at rulers, and i think we can assume that the laissez-faire style it promotes must have lead to some issues as it has in other times and places. Also though: grifters. I love daoism, especially the Zhuangzi, possibly the best book ever, but a lot of sources give me the impression that a lot of daoist priests were just going town to town grifting immortality elixirs and the like.

Also, meekness and non-violence, as much as i love them, fundementally serve the interest of brutal states in excersizing legitimate violence.

All of these religions ran religious dictatorships too.