By argument we cannot come to the conclusion. I can argue, and you can argue, but you may argue more than me. Another person can argue more than you. In this way, you do not come to the conclusion. And śrutayo vibhinnā. So far scriptures are concerned, there are also different scriptures. Nāsāv ṛṣir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam (Mahābhārata, Vana-parva 313.117). And a philosopher is not a philosopher if he does not agree with other . . . if he does not agree other philosophers. So in this way, you are perplexed. Therefore it is advised, mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ (CC Madhya 17.186). We should accept the authority, and then we shall be benefited. So the authorities are mentioned in the śāstra, who are authorities. So if we follow the authority, then we get the conclusion.
So Kṛṣṇa is the authority accepted. At least in India, all the Vedic authorities, Vedāntists, they have accepted Kṛṣṇa as the authority. So we simply follow what Kṛṣṇa says, and we get benefit out of it. Then it is all right. And without following authority, if you go on arguing, there is no end. The same example, that two lawyers, both of them are learned scholar. They are going on arguing on some point, they do not come to conclusion. But when the judge gives his conclusion, that has to be accepted. That is final