This is called the resolution of a legal issue. It’s been resolved face-to-face and by acting according to what’s been admitted. Face-to-face with what? Face-to-face with the Sangha, the Teaching, the Monastic Law, and the persons concerned. This is the meaning of face-to-face with the Sangha: the monks who should be present have arrived, consent has been brought for those who are eligible to give their consent, and no one present objects to the decision. This is the meaning of face-to-face with the Teaching and the Monastic Law: the Teaching, the Monastic Law, the Teacher’s instruction—that by which that legal issue is resolved. This is the meaning of face-to-face with the persons concerned: both the one who confesses and the one he confesses to are present. This is the meaning of acting according to what’s been admitted: the doing of, the performing of, the participation in, the consent to, the agreement to, the non-objection to that legal procedure of acting according to what’s been admitted. When a legal issue has been resolved like this, if the receiver of the confession reopens it, he commits an offense entailing confession for the reopening. If anyone who gave their consent criticizes the resolution, they commit an offense entailing confession.”

Covering over as if with grass “Is it possible that a legal issue arising from an offense should be settled not by acting according to what’s been admitted, but by resolution face-to-face and by covering over as if with grass? It is. How? It may be that monks who are arguing and disputing do and say many things unworthy of monastics. If they consider this and think, ‘If we deal with one another for these offenses, this legal issue might lead to harshness, nastiness, and schism,’ then I allow you to resolve that legal issue by covering over as if with grass. And it should be resolved like this. Everyone should gather in one place. A competent and capable monk should then inform the Sangha: