<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Creation And Evolution in Buddhism</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dailybuddhism.com/archives/96/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dailybuddhism.com/archives/96</link>
	<description>A Daily Dose of Buddhist Wisdom</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 11:53:25 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://www.dailybuddhism.com/archives/96/comment-page-1#comment-339</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 22:23:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dailybuddhism.com/archives/96#comment-339</guid>
		<description>OK, it's not really exactly like the Big Bang theory; it doesn't go anywhere near that far, but it is obviously cyclical in the same way. The universe begins and ends in a regular fashion, only the details between their stories and our science differ a bit.

I don't remember any official doctrine behind what you are asking. I suspect that in those days they just didn't have any real conception of a "planet" or "universe" in the way we do today. On the bottom was water, and the land was on top of that. If land forms on top of the water, that's gotta be the beginning right? Nothing could be under all that water!!!

Just my logical guess. If anyone knows any better, please post it!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK, it&#8217;s not really exactly like the Big Bang theory; it doesn&#8217;t go anywhere near that far, but it is obviously cyclical in the same way. The universe begins and ends in a regular fashion, only the details between their stories and our science differ a bit.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t remember any official doctrine behind what you are asking. I suspect that in those days they just didn&#8217;t have any real conception of a &#8220;planet&#8221; or &#8220;universe&#8221; in the way we do today. On the bottom was water, and the land was on top of that. If land forms on top of the water, that&#8217;s gotta be the beginning right? Nothing could be under all that water!!!</p>
<p>Just my logical guess. If anyone knows any better, please post it!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: truth seeker</title>
		<link>http://www.dailybuddhism.com/archives/96/comment-page-1#comment-337</link>
		<dc:creator>truth seeker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 19:20:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dailybuddhism.com/archives/96#comment-337</guid>
		<description>From what you stated, In the beginning of each cycle, land forms, in darkness, on the surface of the water,...  simple life forms evolved abd changed until creatures ...existed. 

How did the land, darkness, water, and simple life forms come into existence?  If they were created by the "Big Bang" what was in existence to make the big bang?  What is the starting point for all this.  I really ask for better understanding.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From what you stated, In the beginning of each cycle, land forms, in darkness, on the surface of the water,&#8230;  simple life forms evolved abd changed until creatures &#8230;existed. </p>
<p>How did the land, darkness, water, and simple life forms come into existence?  If they were created by the &#8220;Big Bang&#8221; what was in existence to make the big bang?  What is the starting point for all this.  I really ask for better understanding.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
