[908] How may it be that legal issues (adhikaraṇa) are settled by the means of settlement (samatha)? How may it be that legal issues are not settled by the means of settlement?
A legal issue arising from dispute (vivādādhikaraṇa) is settled by settlement in the presence (sammukhāvinaya) and by decision of the majority (yebhuyyasikā); it is not settled by the verdict of mindfulness (sativinaya), by the verdict of past insanity (amūḷhavinaya), by acting according to what is admitted (paṭiññātakaraṇa), by the declaration of further penalty (tassapāpiyasikā), or by covering over with grass (tiṇavatthāraka).
A legal issue arising from accusation (anuvādādhikaraṇa) is settled by settlement in the presence, by the verdict of mindfulness, by the verdict of past insanity, and by the declaration of further penalty; it is not settled by decision of the majority, by acting according to what is admitted, or by covering over with grass.
A legal issue arising from offense (āpattādhikaraṇa) is settled by settlement in the presence, by acting according to what is admitted, and by covering over with grass; it is not settled by decision of the majority, by the verdict of mindfulness, by the verdict of past insanity, or by the declaration of further penalty.
A legal issue arising from business (kiccādhikaraṇa) is settled by settlement in the presence; it is not settled by decision of the majority, by the verdict of mindfulness, by the verdict of past insanity, by acting according to what is admitted, by the declaration of further penalty, or by covering over with grass.
Thus it may be that legal issues are settled by the means of settlement; thus it may be that legal issues are not settled by the means of settlement.
English translation from the Pali (Siam Raṭṭha edition) — under review, not for citation.