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 those who are accusing and those who have been accused are present. This is the meaning of resolution because of past insanity: the doing of, the performing of, the participation in, the consent to, the agreement to, the non-objection to that legal procedure of resolution because of past insanity. When a legal issue has been resolved like this, if any of the participants reopen it, they incur an offense entailing confession for the reopening. If anyone who gave their consent criticizes the resolution, they incur an offense entailing confession.” Resolution by further penalty “Is it possible that a legal issue arising from an accusation should be settled not by resolution through recollection or by resolution because of past insanity, by resolution face-to-face and by further penalty? It may be that a monk accuses a monk of an offense in the midst of the Sangha: