Plato, Aristotle and the Neo-Platonists have traditionally been considered to be the main sources for interpreting Parmenides The Poem. However, in the last century, the logical and filological dilemmas regarding the concept of being have begun to draw the attention of other scholars seeking more precise interpretations of The Poem, such as ancient philosophy commentator Charles Kahn and analytical philosophers Frege and Russell. In this paper I will argue that philosophers Gorgias and Melisso offer a more accurate interpretation of the concept of being discussed in Parmenides original text. Consequently, it will also be shown that in order to understand precisely The Poem, it is necessary to focus on the interpretations drawn by the two pre-Socratic philosophers supra-cited regarding the Poem, rather than to emphasize on the analysis made by Plato and Aristotle. The main reason supporting this argument that will be presented is that the works of such pre-Socratic philosophers were written in a time period much closer to the one of Parmenides than the works of Plato and Aristotle were. In order to build my argument I will first analyze the filological meanings of the concept of being. Then I will scrutinize the formulations of this concept as Kahn presents them. After that, I will examine the formulations of the concept of being in the works of both Melisso and Gorgias. Finally, I will compare and apply all of these formulations and meanings to Parmenides original text, and therefore conclude my argument.