View source for Authoritative decisions

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"authoritative decisions"|"authoritative decision"}}

{{notes|}}

{{compiler|Visnu Murti}}

{{complete|ALL}}

{{first|07Dec08}}

{{last|07Dec08}}

{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=1|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=1|Con=0|Let=0}}

{{total|2}}

{{toc right}}

[[Category:Authoritative]]

[[Category:Decision]]
</div>

<div class="section" id="Srimad-Bhagavatam" text="Srimad-Bhagavatam"><h2>Srimad-Bhagavatam</h2></div>

<div class="sub_section" id="SB_Canto_1" text="SB Canto 1"><h3>SB Canto 1</h3></div>

<div class="quote" book="SB" link="SB 1.19.12" link_text="SB 1.19.12, Translation and Purport">
<div class="heading">The monarchs who ruled the earth in those days were not irresponsible dictators. They scrupulously followed the authoritative decisions of the saints and sages in terms of Vedic injunction.</div>

<div class="text">'''[[Vanisource:SB 1.19.12|SB 1.19.12, Translation and Purport]]: After all the ṛṣis and others had seated themselves comfortably, the King, humbly standing before them with folded hands, told them of his decision to fast until death.'''

Although the King had already decided to fast until death on the bank of the Ganges, he humbly expressed his decision to elicit the opinions of the great authorities present there. Any decision, however important, should be confirmed by some authority. That makes the matter perfect. This means that the monarchs who ruled the earth in those days were not irresponsible dictators. They scrupulously followed the authoritative decisions of the saints and sages in terms of Vedic injunction. Mahārāja Parīkṣit, as a perfect king, followed the principles by consulting the authorities, even up to the last days of his life.</div>
</div>

<div class="section" id="Lectures" text="Lectures"><h2>Lectures</h2></div>

<div class="sub_section" id="Philosophy_Discussions" text="Philosophy Discussions"><h3>Philosophy Discussions</h3></div>

<div class="quote" book="Lec" link="Philosophy Discussion on Mao Tse Tung" link_text="Philosophy Discussion on Mao Tse Tung">
<div class="heading">Authoritative decision. If we accept that, then that is real conclusion.</div>

<div class="text">'''[[Vanisource:Philosophy Discussion on Mao Tse Tung|Philosophy Discussion on Mao Tse Tung]]:'''

Prabhupāda: Controller. Otherwise, there is no end of struggle if you don't accept an authorized mediator.

Śyāmasundara: This Mao Tse Tung...

Prabhupāda: And Kṛṣṇa also says in the Bhagavad..., yah śāstra-vidhim. Śāstra from that śas-dhātu. Yaḥ śāstra-vidhim utsṛjya, giving it up, decides by his whims, na siddhim avāpnoti, they'll never get any siddhi, perfection. Therefore the śāstra should be mediator. But these people have no śāstras. They have got simply that barrel of gun. That's all. And that is very rude. And it will never come to perfection. For the temporary time, this party may win or that party may win. That will never... That is the position in the modern world. They have no authoritative śāstra. They manufacture their own way, and therefore there is no peace. First World War, Second World War, Third World War, and there cannot be any peace. As soon as you become strong, you declare war. Hitler thought, "I am now strong. Let me declare war." And another strong party, America came, Russia came. He was killed. So this is no conclusion. And even after Hitler's being killed, there is no conclusion. So this sort of conflict will never bring any peace. That will go on. That is struggle for existence. That is fighting like animals. Two dogs fighting, two hogs fighting, but that is not conclusion. That fighting will go on so long people will remain as dogs and hogs. That will go on. There is no question of peace.

Śyāmasundara: So real progress only comes through...

Prabhupāda: Authoritative decision. If we accept that, then that is real conclusion.

Śyāmasundara: He says that there is conflict, and you say that...

Prabhupāda: Yes. Conflict is always there. But you cannot come to the conclusion unless you take the right decision from the authority. Two litigants, there is conflict. I say that "You do this." You say, "No, why can I do it? Our agreement is different." So there is conflict. So you go to the court and take the right decision from the judge.</div>
</div>
</div>