Turkish gameshow to try to convert atheists

[John Dibble]

Find God, win a trip to Mecca (or Jerusalem, or Tibet)
Turkish gameshow enlists imam, Greek Orthodox priest, rabbi and monk to try to convert atheists, with pilgrimage as reward

It sounds like the beginning of a joke: what do you get when you put a Muslim imam, a Greek Orthodox priest, a rabbi, a Buddhist monk and 10 atheists in the same room?

Viewers of Turkish television will soon get the punchline when a new gameshow begins that offers a prize arguably greater than that offered by Who Wants to be a Millionaire?

Contestants will ponder whether to believe or not to believe when they pit their godless convictions against the possibilities of a new relationship with the almighty on Penitents Compete (Tovbekarlar Yarisiyor in Turkish), to be broadcast by the Kanal T station. Four spiritual guides from the different religions will seek to convert at least one of the 10 atheists in each programme to their faith.

Those persuaded will be rewarded with a pilgrimage to the spiritual home of their newly chosen creed – Mecca for Muslims, Jerusalem for Christians and Jews, and Tibet for Buddhists.

Continued - http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/02/turkey-penitents-compete-gameshow

[Redalgo]

I wonder how long it will take American televangelists to produce an adaptation of this. O.o

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Couldn't one just pretend to be converted to win a free vacation? I'm sure even atheists might find Jerusalem and Tibet fascinating.

[John Dibble]

Couldn't one just pretend to be converted to win a free vacation? I'm sure even atheists might find Jerusalem and Tibet fascinating.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[anvi]

What is a Buddhist monk doing trying to convert atheists? Buddhists don't believe some supremely powerful divine being created and rules the universe in the first place. 

Is it just a show where these guys compete to convert "contestants" to their own religion?

[John Dibble]

What is a Buddhist monk doing trying to convert atheists? Buddhists don't believe some supremely powerful divine being created and rules the universe in the first place.

Well, if you believe in Buddhism I imagine you would think that practicing it would be beneficial, so you'd want to convert people just for the sake of bettering their existence.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     The thing that I wonder about is why would anyone agree to be tried to converted other than to get a free trip anyway?

[Gustaf]

What is a Buddhist monk doing trying to convert atheists? Buddhists don't believe some supremely powerful divine being created and rules the universe in the first place.

Well, if you believe in Buddhism I imagine you would think that practicing it would be beneficial, so you'd want to convert people just for the sake of bettering their existence.

Isn't there something of a difference between Terevada and Mahayana Buddhism in that respect as well? (with the latter being more typically religious and the former adhering more strongly to traditional Buddhism and the whole "no God"-deal)

[anvi]

Sure, there are important distinctions between Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism.  The major relevant one you may have in mind is the regard each tradition has for figures called bodhisattvas.  In Theravada, bodhisattvas are are just nice but somewhat deluded human practitioners who try to save other suffering beings from the fate of rebirth.  In Mahayana, bodhisattvas, though they begin as human practitioners, transform themselves through their enlightenment and compassionate vows into veritable Buddhist angels.  In Tibetan Buddhism, for example, the Dalai Lama is considered the incarnation of the bodhisattva Avalokitesvara.  But, even in Mahayana, bodhisattvas are not considered gods; they didn't create the universe, and they don't rule or ethically judge anyone--they just help people out.

[The Mikado]

Free vacation to...um...I don't want to go to any of those places.

Tell me when the Cult of Reason is doing theirs.  I'd love to visit Paris.

[Хahar 🤔]

Free vacation to...um...I don't want to go to any of those places.

Tell me when the Cult of Reason is doing theirs.  I'd love to visit Paris.

You're so eurocentric.

[minionofmidas]

Funny. I like the name, too.

[Gustaf]

Sure, there are important distinctions between Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism.  The major relevant one you may have in mind is the regard each tradition has for figures called bodhisattvas.  In Theravada, bodhisattvas are are just nice but somewhat deluded human practitioners who try to save other suffering beings from the fate of rebirth.  In Mahayana, bodhisattvas, though they begin as human practitioners, transform themselves through their enlightenment and compassionate vows into veritable Buddhist angels.  In Tibetan Buddhism, for example, the Dalai Lama is considered the incarnation of the bodhisattva Avalokitesvara.  But, even in Mahayana, bodhisattvas are not considered gods; they didn't create the universe, and they don't rule or ethically judge anyone--they just help people out.

Yeah, I know about the Bodhisattvas. But my impression, especially after being to China, is also that there is a difference in practice, although perhaps not in theory, in that the attitude taken to both the Bodhisattvas and to Buddha himself within Mahayana is more "God-ish" in all but name, whereas the Theravada are more clear-cut and hard-line about there being no Godhood involved.

But I'm no expert on Buddhism. I'm thinking that Mahayana is sort of like Catholics with Madonna. One could argue that the treatment of the Madonna in Catholicism is that of a Godess in all but name, and that this is in line with Catholicism's general approach of including the saints and the Pope as important figures, as opposed to Protestantism which is more hard-line about God being the whole deal.

[anvi]

There are certainly lots of places in south and east Asia where bodhisattvas are highly venerated.  Bodhisattvas are angelic, but they are considered self-made angels; originally human beings that transformed themselves into angelic ones through the perfection of their practice.  In principle, in Mahayana, anyone can and should strive for bodhisattvahood, just as in Theravada anyone can and should strive for buddhahood.  That's mainly why I don't tend to think of bodhisattvas as god-ish.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I wonder how long it will take American televangelists to produce an adaptation of this. O.o

Except the prize will be an all-expense paid trip to...

http://www.holylandexperience.com/

It's stupid and offensive.

And if people's belief-systems are that easily manipulable... then, they deserve the humiliation.

[Torie]

What percentage belong to each Buddhist branch I wonder?

[anvi]

Don't know exactly, but Mahayana is mostly found in east Asia and Theravada in south Asia, so the former outnumbers the latter considerably.

[Gustaf]

From what I recall, countries dominated by buddhism tend to be Theravada, but China is mahayana and China is a hell of a big country. I don't recall whether Japanese buddhism is counted as Mahayana though, since they have their weird Shinto-fusion going on as well.

[anvi]

Theravada Buddhism is mainly found in Sri Lanka, Thailand, Nepal, Cambodia  and India (though India has the Tibetan diaspora, which is Mahayana, also).  China, Korea, Vietnam and Japan are the countries where Mahayana is practially exclusively found.   There are far larger numbers of Mahayana Buddhists in East Asia than Theravada Buddhism in South Asia.  Japan allows people to idenfy multiple religious traditions as part of their heritage and so there are lots of people who consider themselves Shinto practitioners and Buddhists.  But, in East Asia in general, multiple religious identification is not uncommon.  The saying goes back all the way to mid-Tang dynasty China (800 CE) that "I wear a Confucian hat, a Daoist robe and Buddhist sandals."

[minionofmidas]

There is a bit of Tibetan diaspora (counting here both the visible but few exiles, and the people in Ladakh and the relevant parts of Sikkim and Arunachal), but the vast majority of Buddhists in India are of course the Ambedkarite Neobuddhists, strongly concentrated in Maharashtra. Do they count as Theravada? Seems somewhat under debate, actually (they're not Mahayana, that much is clear.)

[anvi]

Thanks Lewis, and yeah, that's a good point.  I think Ambedkar Buddhists primarily cite Theravada scriptures in their own works, but they don't accept the whole Theravada tripitaka and do make reference to both Mahayana and Vajrayana sources sometimes.  On top of that, it's not really a monastic movement like Theravada, but mostly based on political resistance to caste and education.  I'm kind of persuaded by those who call Ambedkarites Neobuddhists (navayana), rather than classifying them as belonging to any of the major movements.