Because Buddhism teaches that there is no permanent self or soul and, indeed, that all things are impermanent, the question regarding the concept that after death the soul enters a new body should be modified to reflect Buddhism's unique teachings about the mechanism of rebirth (i.e., that the impermanent components of what is conventionally called the self continue to change into new forms). It may be difficult to word such a question in a way that's not clunky, but I think it's necessary to avoid the misleading implication that Buddhism teaches the existence of a soul.
Agreed. Although it can be argued that Theravada Buddhism teaches not-self instead of no-self, in which the 5 aggregates are empty of self but self still exists as fleeting awareness.
I would like to see similar quizzes for all the major world religions, preferably made by an adherent rather than someone like me who would just look up the facts and probably miss important parts.
Your definition of bodhisattva is not technically wrong, but it misses the essence of the term by such a wide margin that it's effectively wrong. It's too generic and broad. (For example, in Theravada Buddhism--and the bodhisattva is especially a Mahayana Buddhist ideal--the monks and nuns in the Sangam are on their way to [see answer to the clue above (s.a.t.t.c.a.)], as is everyone else following their [see answer to clue 3 below].) A bodhisattva is one who stops just short of attaining [s.a.t.t.c.a.] out of compassion in order to dedicate their existence towards helping everyone else achieve [s.a.t.t.c.a.], too.
I tend to agree with OP, especially since they correctly highlight that Mahayana philosophy has a distinct conception of what a bodhisattva is and, to my understanding, it is a far more important concept in theory and practice than in Theravada. Like OP, I would define a bodhisattva as somebody who as vowed to attain enlightenment but to remain in samsara for the benefit of all sentient beings. They develop and embody bodhicitta, which is a compassionate mind directed towards awakening for the sake of all beings.
I don't quite understand why the Wikipedia article uses such a broad definition or why you would simply use their definition without looking at other sources. The concept doesn't hold equal weight in different strands of Buddhism, so trying to combine all of its meanings into a single definition seems silly.
This definition of karma is wrong. "What goes around comes around" is a bastardized misinterpretation by westerners. This is a quiz about Buddhism, so it should probably reflect what karma actually refers to in Buddhism, no?
Karma is the "intentional actions" one takes. The law of karma refers to the idea that one's karma will affect the "fruit of their karma", karmaphala. The cycle of rebirth, or reincarnation, is based on karmaphala. Your lot in life is based on your karmaphala, since the morally bad karma will carry on in rebirth and likewise for morally good karma.
Even interpreting the law of karma to mean "what goes around comes around" is an oversimplification. But, since we want people to get to type in the familiar word, the answer should be "The law of __________," where the blank is "karma".
I sort of understand where you're coming from but I don't see any clear recommendation for an improvement to the clue in your comment. The clue as it is now states that "what goes around comes around" is a rough description of karma, which seems pretty accurate to me. It encapsulates the basic idea that one's actions give rise to future consequences, as does a phrase like "you reap what you sow." Is your objection to the clue lacking any mention of rebirth? Obviously it's oversimplified to some extent, but it hardly seems incorrect to me.
I'm not sure you even read any of what Dimby wrote. They very clearly state how they wish the quiz to be changed (see the last sentence). Also, they clearly state that their objection to the clue is that it describes karma as being "what goes around comes around", rather than the law of karma, which is what Dimby states to be the correct phrase.
Always nice when an internet stranger decides to be snarky for no reason! Looking back at my comment it's obvious that Dimby's argument wasn't entirely clear to me, that was sort of the point of my comment.
Dimby 1) says the given definition of karma is wrong, 2) defines karma more clearly, and 3) suggests a change to the answer, not the clue. The suggestion is that the answer be "the law of karma" where users still just have to type "karma." Dimby objects to the clue but doesn't suggest a change to it or any functional change to the answer, simply that the answer should fill in a blank that ends up representing the given definition better. Whether that change registers with takers depends entirely on people noticing that the answer is "the law of karma" rather than just "karma." They still just have to type "karma."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodhisattva
For example, your definition does not seem to apply to Theravada Buddhism.
I don't quite understand why the Wikipedia article uses such a broad definition or why you would simply use their definition without looking at other sources. The concept doesn't hold equal weight in different strands of Buddhism, so trying to combine all of its meanings into a single definition seems silly.
Karma is the "intentional actions" one takes. The law of karma refers to the idea that one's karma will affect the "fruit of their karma", karmaphala. The cycle of rebirth, or reincarnation, is based on karmaphala. Your lot in life is based on your karmaphala, since the morally bad karma will carry on in rebirth and likewise for morally good karma.
Even interpreting the law of karma to mean "what goes around comes around" is an oversimplification. But, since we want people to get to type in the familiar word, the answer should be "The law of __________," where the blank is "karma".
Dimby 1) says the given definition of karma is wrong, 2) defines karma more clearly, and 3) suggests a change to the answer, not the clue. The suggestion is that the answer be "the law of karma" where users still just have to type "karma." Dimby objects to the clue but doesn't suggest a change to it or any functional change to the answer, simply that the answer should fill in a blank that ends up representing the given definition better. Whether that change registers with takers depends entirely on people noticing that the answer is "the law of karma" rather than just "karma." They still just have to type "karma."
Thailand is 93% and Cambodia is 97%.