[1060] [Question:] Settlement in the presence (sammukhāvinaya) and settlement by mindfulness (sativinaya) — are these principles conjoined or disjoined? And is it possible, having separated these principles one from another, to declare a difference between them?
Settlement in the presence and settlement on account of past insanity (amūḷhavinaya) … Settlement in the presence and acting according to what has been admitted (paṭiññātakaraṇa); settlement in the presence and decision by majority (yebhuyyasikā); settlement in the presence and the verdict of aggravated misconduct (tassapāpiyasikā); settlement in the presence and covering over with grass (tiṇavatthāraka) — are these principles conjoined or disjoined? And is it possible, having separated these principles one from another, to declare a difference between them?
[Answer:] Settlement in the presence and settlement by mindfulness — these principles are conjoined, not disjoined; and it is not possible, having separated these principles one from another, to declare a difference between them.
Settlement in the presence and settlement on account of past insanity … Settlement in the presence and acting according to what has been admitted; settlement in the presence and decision by majority; settlement in the presence and the verdict of aggravated misconduct; settlement in the presence and covering over with grass — these principles are conjoined, not disjoined; and it is not possible, having separated these principles one from another, to declare a difference between them.
English translation from the Pali (Siam Raṭṭha edition) — under review, not for citation.