Bhante,

what you just wrote only further confused me. I can accept any relevant comparison as part of the discussion, but not without reference to the Tipitaka.

In addition, the use of the "military" in general, is not a good example. Are we referring to ancient Greek or modern American? The modern military, say American, has a very well-defined organisational structure, but the Buddhist Sangha is based on a loose structure.

metta,
Yong Peng.

--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, ashinpan wrote:

> I agree. I am in fact interested in textual references from the Tipitaka, not so much about personal opinions. I am not saying that personal views are not welcomed, but supported by some references to the suttas is preferred.

What I have said is not just a personal opinion. What I am trying to do is to form a hypothesis by comparing two organizations which are very different in nature and have very different functions, but which accept social barriers within themselves as a norm. My hunch is that if we understand one organization, that understanding will be helpful to understand the other.

What I am doing at this stage is what they call "brainstorming"; I don't have even a hypothetical answer yet.