1. 'Now, O Bhikkhus, an official act carried out against a Bhikkhu who has confessed himself guilty is invalid as follows, and is valid as follows. And how does such an official act become invalid? In case a Bhikkhu have committed a Pârâgika offence, and in respect thereof either the Samgha, or a number of Bhikkhus, or a single Bhikkhu warns him, saying, "The venerable one has been guilty of a Pârâgika." And he replies thus, "I have not, Sirs, been guilty of a Pârâgika. I have been guilty of a Samghâdisesa." And in respect thereof the Samgha deals with him for a Samghâdisesa. Then that official act is invalid.'
[And so also if on being warned of any one of the seven offences 1 he confesses himself to be guilty of any one of the offences different from the one charged, then the official act is invalid.]
2. 'And when, O Bhikkhus, is such an official act valid? In case a Bhikkhu have committed a Pârâgika offence, and in respect thereof the Samgha, or a number of Bhikkhus, or a single Bhikkhu warns him, saying, "The venerable one has been guilty of a Pârâgika." And he replies, "Yea, Sirs, I have been guilty of a Pârâgika." And in respect thereof the Samgha deals with him for a Pârâgika. Then that official act is valid 2.'
[And so for each of the other offences mentioned in § 1, the whole of § 2 is repeated.]
24:1 The same, namely, as those in the list given at Mahâvagga IV, 16, 12, &c.
24:2 In other words, if a Bhikkhu confesses an offence different from that with which he has been charged, the confession cannot be used against him even as regards a decision with respect to the offence confessed.
24:3 On this chapter, see further below, IV, 14, 16.