Parmenides’ and Śaṅkara’s Nondual Being without Not-being

This essay compares the philosophical systems of Parmenides, a Greek philosopher from the fifth century BCE, and Śaṅkara, an Indian philosopher from the eighth to ninth centuries CE. It argues that Parmenides' concept of being parallels Śaṅkara's nonduality of Brahman and ātman. The focus is on their shared methods for guiding readers to know nondual reality: both first make a distinction (krísis/viveka) between being (real, Self) and not-being (unreal, Non-self), and then use negative dialectic to test what common sense takes as fundamental characteristics of reality.

Study at a glance

Abstract

This essay explores the similarities in the thought of the Greek philosopher Parmenides (fifth century b.c.e .) and that of the Indian philosopher Śaṅkara (eighth to ninth centuries c.e .). Parmenides’ being is compared to the nonduality of Brahman and ātman , as defended by Sankara. The focus is especially on the methods used by both philosophers to help readers know nondual reality. First, they both make a distinction ( krísis/viveka ) between being (real, Self) and not-being (unreal, Non-self); and second, starting from this distinction, they both test, by means of negative dialectic, what, according to common sense, are the fundamental characteristics of reality.