Being and Non Being : Unexplored Similarities between Greek philosopher Parmenides and Bhagavan Shri Krishna in Bhagavad Gita.

I vividly remember, during my childhood, wondering how something could exist. How is it possible for anything to exist? If you think about it logically, it seems impossible to imagine that something could exist. However, it is easier to imagine that nothing should exist, or rather, that there should be nothing. At some point in time, there must have been nothing because how could something exist eternally? And if something did exist eternally, where did this something come from?

Another dilemma I had was that if there was nothing at some point, how could something come out of nothing? When you think about it, it seems absurd to imagine that something could emerge from nothing. Yet the fact remains: we live in a world filled with universes and galaxies, so that ship has sailed. We now know, beyond any doubt, that there is something rather than nothing.

What this "something" truly is remains a matter of debate and investigation among scientists, mystics, and philosophers. But the undeniable truth is that there is something, not nothing.

While these ideas were lingering in my subconscious mind, I learned about Parmenides through my teacher, Francis Lucille, who often referred to his philosophy of Being and Non-Being during his talks. Intrigued, I decided to explore Parmenides’ poem, and to my surprise, I discovered a fascinating similarity between his philosophy and the core teachings of the Bhagavad Gita.

Parmenides (circa 515–450 BCE) was a pre-Socratic Greek philosopher from the city of Elea (modern-day Velia in southern Italy) and is considered one of the most influential figures in Western philosophy.

He wrote an intriguing poem titled On Nature, often referred to as the Poem of Parmenides. It can be accessed at the link below, which includes an English translation by John Burnet (1982):Parmenides' Poem on Nature - English Translation

I have taken the liberty of using parts of the poem that seemed relevant to me for my essay and to share my understanding of them. However, I would strongly encourage everyone to read the entire poem at least once.

“when the daughters of the Sun, hasting to convey me into the light, threw back their veils from off their faces and left the abode of Night.”

“and the goddess greeted me kindly, and took my right hand in hers, and spake to me these words: - Welcome, noble youth, that comest to my abode on the car that bears thee tended by immortal charioteers !”

In the opening part of the poem, Parmenides describes a mystical experience of journeying to a divine realm of Light, where he is greeted by a goddess who speaks to him, conveying what appears to be a profound revelation.

“Come now, I will tell thee - and do thou hearken to my saying and carry it away - the only two ways of search that can be thought of. The first, namely, that It is, and that it is impossible for anything not to be, is the way of. conviction, for truth is its companion.. The other, namely, that It is not, and that something must needs not be, - that, I tell thee, is a wholly untrustworthy path. For you cannot know what is not - that is impossible - nor utter it;”

This to me is most interesting revelation as What is, is and it must Be, it cannot NOT BE. This is the way of conviction because truth is its companion as it is our experience that there is something rather than nothing. The next part is Whatever is not, is not. It cannot BE and hence it must NOT BE.

“It needs must be that what can be thought and spoken of is; for it is possible for it to be, and it is not possible for, what is nothing to be”

From experience, you cannot know what is not, and therefore, it is impossible to think about it as well. You can only know and think about what is.

“One path only is left for us to speak of, namely, that It is. In it are very many tokens that what is, is uncreated and indestructible, alone, complete, immovable and without end. Nor was it ever, nor will it be; for now it is, all at once, a continuous one. For what kind of origin for it. will you look for ? In what way and from what source could it have drawn its increase ? I shall not let thee say nor think that it came from what is not; for it can neither be thought nor uttered that what is not is. And, if it came from nothing, what need could have made it arise later rather than sooner ? Therefore must it either be altogether or be not at all”

Therefore the only possible path is that IT IS. What IS is uncreated and indestructible, alone, complete, immovable and without end. This means What IS is not limited in any way, neither in time or space. Therefore it cannot move or grow or shrink or change – all these are impossible. Impossible because if it has to increase from what source will it draw its content and if it would decrease where would the content that decreased go. Also if it came from nothing, how can something come out of nothing and how can nothing exists before something came from nothing.

This also means that there is no time as time can be only perceived in terms of change but if whatever IS, IS and it never has changed, never improving or deteriorating but always perfect and complete then time does not exist. Then what is this what we see – the ever changing world?  Parmenides says that the world of change and motion is an illusion and that nothing you really see or hear is actually REAL as your sensory faculties lead to false conceptions and that they are the way of DOXA or opinions based on individual sensory impressions.

Now very interestingly, Bhagwan Shri Krishna in the Bhagwat Geeta in Chapter 2. Verse 16 (2.16) says

"nāsad vidyate bhāvo nābhāvo vidyate sataḥ |ubhayor api dṛṣṭo ’ntaḥ tv anayos tattva-darśibhiḥ"

This means that which is unreal has no existence and hence cannot come into existence and that which is truly real can never cease to be or cannot, not be. This literally means What is, is and it must Be, it cannot NOT BE. Whatever is not, is not. It cannot BE and hence it must NOT BE.  Just what Parmenides says!

"Nā sad vidyate bhāvaḥ": That which is unreal cannot have any real existence or cannot BE

"Na abhāvo vidyate sataḥ": That which is real cannot go out of existence or cannot NOT BE

"Ubhayor api dṛṣṭaḥ antaḥ Tattva-darśibhiḥ ": The difference between the real and the unreal has been clearly established by those who have realized the real (tattva).

Disclaimer : These views are entirely based upon my own understanding of the Poem of Parmenides and the lines from the Bhagavat Geeta; these may not be the same as mentioned anywhere else, and I do not claim them to be the truth.