000007 - 500: Buddhist History - Bhavyaviveka, Founder of the Svatantrika Tradition

*Bhavyaviveka, the founder of the Svatantrika tradition of the Madhyamaka school of Buddhism, is believed to have been born in this year.

Bhavyaviveka (or Bhavya) (Chinese: 清辯 (pinyin: Qīngbiàn); (c. 500 – c. 578) was the founder of the Svatantrika tradition of the Mādhyamaka school of Buddhism. Bhavyaviveka is one of the first Buddhist logicians to employ the 'formal syllogism' of Indian Logic in expounding the Mādhyamaka which he employed to considerable effect in his commentary to Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, entitled the Prajñāpradīpa.

According to one source, Bhavyaviveka was born to the east of Magadha in India of a Kashatriya family. He was ordained by Nagarjuna.

Another source claims he was born of a royal family of "Mālaya-ra" in South India. After becoming a monk he travelled to Madhya-desa ('Middle India') and received teachings on the Mahayana sutras and Nagarjuna's texts from Acarya Samgharakṣita. After this he returned to southern India and became the head of 50 temples and taught extensively.

Bhavya wrote an independent work on the Madhyamaka entitled the Madhyamakahrdaya-karika in which Bhavya in turn wrote an auto-commentary entitled the Tarkajvala (Blaze of Reasoning).

The Prajñāpradīpa is Bhavyaviveka's commentary upon Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. The Sanskrit is no longer extant (except for a few embedded quotations in the Prasannapadā, Candrakīrti's commentary of the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā and critique of the Prajñāpradīpa) but is available in both an excellent Tibetan translation, rendered by Jñānagarbha and Cog ro Klu'i rgyal mtshan in the early ninth century. The Sanskrit name has been reconstructed as either Prajñāpradīpa or Janāndeepa (where Janāndeepa may or may not be a Prakrit corruption or a poor inverse-translation, for example).

After the death of Buddhapalita (470–550), Bhavyaviveka refuted his views by writing a commentary on the Root Wisdom called Wisdom Lamp (Janāndeepa) relying on Nagarjuna's teachings. This text laid the foundations for the Svatantrika school of Buddhism.

In the Svatantrika tradition reasoning is used to establish that phenomena (dharmas) have no self-nature, and further arguments to establish that the true nature of all phenomena is emptiness. This school differs from the predominant Prasangika tradition in that the latter refrain from making any assertions whatsoever about the true nature of phenomena.

The designation as Bhavyaviveka as 'founder' of the Svatantrika school is not uncontroversial, not least because the very existence of an independent 'Svatantrika' school in India is not well attested. While it is certain that later Tibetan doxographers divided the Madhyamaka philosophy of Nagarjuna into Svatantrika (other inference) and Prasangkika (consequence), and that this manner of division has currency today in contemporary Tibetan monasteries, other methods of division existed.

In the lineage of the Tibetan Panchen Lamas there were considered to be four Indian and three Tibetan mindstream emanations of Amitabha Buddha before Khedrup Gelek Pelzang, who is recognised as the first Panchen Lama. The lineage starts with Subhuti, one of the original disciples of Gautama Buddha. Bhavaviveka is considered to be the third Indian mindstream emanation of Amitabha Buddha in this line.

000006 - 500: Christian History - Conal, Irish Bishop

*Conal, an Irish bishop, is believed to have died in this year.

Conal (also known as Conall or Conall Stickler) was an Irish bishop who flourished in the second half of the fifth century and ruled over the church of Drum, County Roscommon, the place being subsequently named Drumconnell, after Conal.

Attracta is said to have prophesied that the episcopal churches of Conal (Drumconnell) and Dachonna (Eas Dachonna) would be reduced to poverty, owing to the fame of a new monastic establishment. This prophecy was strikingly fulfilled, inasmuch as Drum and Assylin soon after ceased to be episcopal sees, while in 1148 the great Cistercian Abbey of Boyle was founded.

Conal died about the year 500, and his feast is celebrated on May 22, though some assign the March 18 or February 9 as the date.

000005 - 500: Christian History - Fedelmid Find, Roman Catholic Archibishop of Ireland

*Fedelmid Find, a Roman Catholic Archbishop of Armagh diocese, Ireland and Primate of All Ireland from 558 to 578, is believed to have been born in this year.
 

Fedelmid Find (Also called Feidlimid Fin, Fethlin Fionn, Feidhlimidh Finn, Feidlimidh, Fedlimid, Fedilmid, Feidilmed) b. c.500 - d.30 October 578, was the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Armagh diocese, Ireland and Primate of All Ireland from 558 to 578.

 

Saint Fedelmid Find was a descendant or grandson of Fáelan and was born c. 500 in a place called Domnach Nemand. He was presumably a younger son as he was destined for the church rather than succeeding to the family estate. He probably did not have a wife or children as he is referred to as “virginal” in the Martyrology of Gorman.
 

On the death of Saint Fiachra mac Colmain, the Archbishop of Armagh on July 25, 558, Fedelmid Find was appointed as the 11th Archbishop in succession to Saint Patrick. Fedelmid Find reigned as Archbishop for 20 years.
 

Fedelmid Find died in 578. After his death Fedelmid Find was venerated as a saint and his feast was celebrated on the 30th of October, the day of his death.

000004 - 500: Christian History - Dionysius Exiguus, Inventor of Anno Domini

Dionysius Exiguus, the inventor of Anno Domini and the man whose work would lead to the establishment of Jesus' birthday as December 25, began living in Rome.

Dionysius Exiguus ("Dennis the Small", "Dennis the Dwarf", "Dennis the Little" or "Dennis the Short") (c. 470 – c. 544) was a 6th-century monk born in Scythia Minor, modern Dobruja shared by Romania and Bulgaria. He was a member of the Scythian monks community concentrated in Tomis, the major city of Scythia Minor. Dionysius is best known as the "inventor" of the Anno Domini (AD) era, which is used to number the years of both the Gregorian calendar and the (Christianized) Julian calendar.

From about 500 C. C., Dionysius lived in Rome, where, as a learned member of the Roman Curia, he translated from Greek into Latin 401 ecclesiastical canons, including the apostolical canons and the decrees of the councils of Nicaea, Constantinople, Chalcedon and Sardis, and also a collection of the decretals of the popes from Siricius to Anastasius II. These collections had great authority in the West and still guide church administrations. Dionysius also wrote a treatise on elementary mathematics.

The author of a continuation of Dionysius's Computus, writing in 616, described Dionysius as a "most learned abbot of the city of Rome", and the Venerable Bede accorded him the honorific abbas, which could be applied to any monk, especially a senior and respected monk, and does not necessarily imply that Dionysius ever headed a monastery. Indeed, Dionysius's friend Cassiodorus stated in Institutiones that he was still only a monk late in life.

Dionysius is best known as the inventor of the Anno Domini era, which is used to number the years of both the Gregorian calendar and the Julian calendar. He used it to identify the several Easters in his Easter table, but did not use it to date any historical event. When he devised his table, Julian calendar years were identified by naming the consuls who held office that year. He himself stated that the "present year" was "the consulship of Probus Junior", which he also stated was 525 years "since the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ". How he arrived at that number is unknown but there is evidence of the system he applied. He invented a new system of numbering years to replace the Diocletian years that had been used in an old Easter table because he did not wish to continue the memory of a tyrant who persecuted Christians. The Anno Domini era became dominant in Western Europe only after it was used by the Venerable Bede to date the events in his Ecclesiastical History of the English People, completed in 731.

There exists evidence that Dionysius' desire to replace Diocletian years (Diocletian persecuted Christians) with a calendar based on the incarnation of Christ was to prevent people from believing the imminent end of the world. At the time it was believed that the Resurrection and the end of the world would occur 500 years after the birth of Jesus. The current Anno Mundi calendar commenced with the creation of the world based on information in the Old Testament. It was believed that based on the Anno Mundi calendar Jesus was born in the year 5500 (or 5500 years after the world was created) with the year 6000 of the Anno Mundi calendar marking the end of the world. Anno Mundi 6000 (approximately AD 500) was thus equated with the resurrection of Christ and the end of the world. Since this date had already passed in the time of Dionysius, he therefore searched for a new end of the world at a later date. He was heavily influenced by ancient cosmology, in particular the doctrine of the Great Year that places a strong emphasis on planetary conjunctions. This doctrine says that when all the planets were in conjunction that this cosmic event would mark the end of the world. Dionysius accurately calculated that this conjunction would occur in about 1500 years after the life of Dionysius (in fact in May AD 2000). Dionysius then applied another astronomical timing mechanism based on precession of the equinoxes (that had only been discovered about six centuries earlier). Though incorrect, some oriental astronomers at the time believed that the precessional cycle was 24,000 years which included twelve astrological ages of 2,000 years each. Dionysius believed that if the planetary alignment marked the end of an age (i.e., the Pisces age), then the birth of Jesus Christ marked the beginning of the Age of Pisces 2,000 years earlier on the 25th of March (the former feast of Incarnation, now Annunciation, near the date of the Northern Hemisphere Spring Equinox and beginning of many yearly calendars from ancient times). He, therefore, deducted 2,000 years from the May 2000 conjunction to produce AD 1 for the incarnation of Christ even though modern scholars and the Roman Catholic Church acknowledge that the birth of Jesus was a few years earlier than AD 1.

In 525, Dionysius prepared a table of the future dates of Easter and a set of "arguments" explaining their calculation (computus) on his own initiative, at the request of Pope John I. He introduced his tables and arguments via a letter to a bishop Petronius (also written in 525) and added another explanatory letter (written in 526). These works in volume 67 of the 217 volume Patrologia Latina also include a letter from Bishop Proterius of Alexandria to Pope Leo (written before 457). Though not named by Dionysius, this collection was recently called his Liber de Paschate (Book on Easter).

Dionysius ignored the existing tables used by the Church of Rome, which were prepared in 457 by Victorius of Aquitaine, complaining that they did not obey Alexandrian principles, without actually acknowledging their existence. To be sure that his own tables were correct, he simply extended a set of tables prepared in Alexandria that had circulated in the West in Latin, but were never used in the West to determine the date of Easter (however, they were used in the Byzantine Empire, in Greek). The Latin tables were prepared by a subordinate of Bishop Cyril of Alexandria shortly before Cyril's death in 444. They covered a period of 95 years or five decennovenal (19-year) cycles with years dated in the Diocletian Era, whose first year was 285 (the modern historical year in progress at Easter). Diocletian years were advantageous because their division by 19 yielded a remainder equal to the year of the decennovenal cycle (1–19).

Dionysius' tables were quickly adopted at Rome, and from this time the arguments between Rome and Alexandria regarding the correct date for the celebration of Easter came to an end – both used identical tables and hence observed the feast on the same day.

The epact (the age of the moon on 22 March) of all first decennovenal years was zero, making Dionysius the first known medieval Latin writer to use a precursor of the number zero. The Latin word nulla meaning no/none was used because no Roman numeral for zero existed. To determine the decennovenal year, the Dionysian year plus one was divided by 19. If the result was zero (to be replaced by 19), it was represented by the Latin word nihil, also meaning nothing. Both "zeros" continued to be used by (among others) Bede, by whose extension of Dionysius Exiguus’ Easter table to a great Easter cycle all future Julian calendar dates of Easter Sunday were fixed unambiguously at last. However, in medieval Europe one had to wait as late as the second millennium to see the number zero itself come into use, although it had come into being around the year 600 in India.

Dionysius copied the last decennovenal cycle of the Cyrillian table ending with Diocletian 247, and then added a new 95-year table with numbered Anni Domini Nostri Jesu Christi (Years of our Lord Jesus Christ) because, as he explained to Petronius, he did not wish to continue the memory of a tyrant who persecuted Christians. The only reason he gave for beginning his new 95-year table with the year 532 was that six years were still left in the Cyrillian table after the year during which he wrote. For the latter year he only stated that it was 525 years after the Incarnation of Christ, without stating when the latter event occurred in any other calendar. He did not realize that the dates of the Alexandrian Easter repeated after 532 years, despite his apparent knowledge of the Victorian 532-year 'cycle', indicating only that Easter did not repeat after 95 years. He knew that Victorian Easters did not agree with Alexandrian Easters, thus he no doubt assumed that they had no bearing on any Alexandrian cycle. Furthermore, he obviously did not realize that simply multiplying 19 by 4 by 7 (decennovenal cycle × cycle of leap years × days in a week) fixed the Alexandrian cycle at 532 years, otherwise he would have stated such a simple fact.

Most of the British Church accepted the Dionysian tables after the Synod of Whitby in 664, which agreed that the old British method (the insular latercus) should be dropped in favor of the Roman one. Quite a few individual churches and monasteries refused to accept them, the last holdout finally accepting them during the early 10th century. The Church of the Franks (France) accepted them during the late 8th century under the tutelage of Alcuin, after he arrived from Britain.

Ever since the 2nd century, some bishoprics in the Eastern Roman Empire had counted years from the birth of Christ, but there was no agreement on the correct epoch – Clement of Alexandria (c. 190) and Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 320) wrote about these attempts. Because Dionysius did not place the Incarnation in an explicit year, competent scholars have deduced both AD 1 and 1 BC. Most have selected 1 BC (historians do not use a year zero). Because the anniversary of the Incarnation was 25 March, which was near Easter, a year that was 525 years "since the Incarnation" implied that 525 whole years were completed near that Easter. Consequently one year since the Incarnation would have meant 25 March 1, meaning that Dionysius placed the Incarnation on 25 March 1 BC. Because the birth of Jesus was nine calendar months later, Dionysius implied, but never stated, that Jesus was born 25 December 1 BC. One scholar, Georges Declerq (Declerq, 2002), thinks that Dionysius placed the Incarnation and Nativity in AD 1, basing his conclusion on the structure of Dionysius's Easter tables. In either case, Dionysius ignored his predecessors, who usually placed the Nativity in the year we now label 2 BC. In his 1605 thesis, the Polish historian Laurentius Suslyga was the first to suggest that Christ was actually born around 4 BC, deriving this from the chronology of Herod the Great, his son Philip the Tetrarch, and the daughter of Augustus, Julia. Having read Suslyga's work, Kepler noted that Christ was born during the reign of King Herod the Great, whose death he placed in 4 BC. Kepler chose this year because Josephus stated that a lunar eclipse occurred shortly before Herod's death. According to Josephus, Herod died in the year 4 or 3 BC.

Although Dionysius stated that the First Council of Nicaea in 325 sanctioned his method of dating Easter, the surviving documents are ambiguous. A canon of the council implied that the Roman and Alexandrian methods were the same even though they were not, whereas a delegate from Alexandria stated in a letter to his brethren that their method was supported by the council. In either case, Dionysius' method had actually been used by the Church of Alexandria (but not by the Church of Rome) at least as early as 311, and probably began during the first decade of the 4th century, its dates naturally being given in the Alexandrian calendar. Thus Dionysius did not develop a new method of dating Easter. The most that he may have done was convert its arguments from the Alexandrian calendar into the Julian calendar.

000003 - 500: Christian History - The Use of Incense

The use of incense dates back to biblical times and may have originated in Egypt, where the gums and resins of aromatic trees were imported from the Arabian and Somali coasts to be used in religious ceremonies. It was also used by the Pharaohs, not only to counteract unpleasant odors, but as they believed, also to drive away demons and gratify the presence of the gods.

The Babylonians used incense extensively while offering prayers to divining oracles. In India, around 2000 B.C.T., various writings mention "perfumers" and "incense sellers". Evidence suggests oils were used mainly for their aroma. Incense spread from there to Greece and Rome. Incense was imported into Israel in the 5th century B.C.T. to be used in religious offerings.

Brought to Japan in the 6th century of the Christian calendar by Chinese Buddhist monks, who used the mystical aromas in their purification rites, the delicate scents of Koh (high-quality Japanese incense) became a source of amusement and entertainmtne with nobles in the Imperial Court during the Heian Era 200 years later.

During the Shogunate period in the 14th century of the Christian calendar, samurai warriors would perfume their helmets and armor with incense to achieve a proud aura of invincibility. It was not until the Muromachi Era during the 15th and 16th century that incense appreciation (Kodo) spread to the upper and middle classes of Japanese society.

When, exactly, incense was introduced into the religious services of the Christian Church is not precisely known. During the first four centuries, there is no evidence for its use. Nevertheless, its common employment in the Temple and the references to it in the New Testament suggest an early familiarity with it in Christian worship.

Symbolically, incense, with its sweet-smelling perfume and high-ascending smoke, is typical of the good Christian's prayer, which, enkindled in the heart by the fire of God's love and exhaling the odor of Christ, rises up as a pleasing offering to God's sight.

000002 - 500: Jewish History - The Development of Piyyutim (Jewish liturgical poetry)

Liturgical poetry, piyyut (a Greek derived term), was finely developed, at first, it would seem, in Israel.

A piyyut (plural piyyutim), is a Jewish liturgical poem, usually designated to be sung, chanted, or recited during religious services. Piyyutim have been written since Temple times. Most piyyutim are in Hebrew or Aramaic, and most follow some poetic scheme, such as an acrostic following the order of the Hebrew alphabet or spelling out the name of the author.

Many piyyutim are familiar to regular attendees of synagogue services. For example, the best-known piyyut may be Adon Olam ("Master of the World"), sometimes attributed to Solomon ibn Gabirol in 11th century Spain. Its poetic form consists simply of rhyming iambic tetrameter, and it is so beloved that it is often sung at the conclusion of many synagogue services, after the ritual nightly saying of the Shema, and during the morning ritual of putting on tefillin. Another well-beloved piyyut is Yigdal ("May God be Hallowed"), which is based upon the Thirteen Principles of Faith developed by Maimonides. The author of a piyyut is known as a paytan (plural paytanim). Composed in learned Hebrew or Aramaic, piyyut drew on and played with biblical expressions and incorporated rabbinic exegesis (midrash). Piyyut was first introduced to stand in for non-fixed parts of the synagogue service (in an era when worshipers did not have prayer books), but it came to embellish parts of the Sabbath and especially festival liturgy when prayers became more standard. Earlier piyyutim were anonymous, but there now began to appear works by the great classic paytanim (payyetanim), Yosi ben Yosi, Yannai, and Eleazar ben Kalir, Piyyut continued to flourish through the Middle Ages, especially in Mediterranean lands, from Israel to Spain.

000001 - 500: Jewish History - The Conversion of Abu-Kariba

*It is believed that Abu-Kariba, the King of Himyar, converted to Judaism in this year.

The Himyarite Kingdom (anciently called the Homerite Kingdom by the Greeks and the Romans), was a state in ancient Yemen dating from 110 B.C.T. It conquered neighboring Saba (Sheba) around 25 B.C.T., Qataban around 200 C.C., and Hadramaut around 300 C.C. Its political fortunes relative to Saba (Sheba) changed frequently until it finally conquered the Sabaean Kingdom around 280 C.C.

The Himyarite Kingdom was the dominant state in Arabia until 525 C.C. The economy was based on agriculture. Foreign trade was based on the export of frankincense and myrrh. For many years, the Himyarite Kingdom was also the major intermediary linking East Africa and the Mediterranean world. This trade largely consisted of exporting ivory from Africa to be sold in the Roman Empire. Ships from Himyar regularly traveled the East African coast, and the state also exerted a considerable amount of political control of the trading cities of East Africa.

Between 110 B.C.T. and 300 C.C. the Himyarite Kingdom conquered the Kingdom of Sheba and took Redan for its capital instead of Ma’rib. Later on, Redan was called "Zifar." Its ruins still lie on Mudawwar Mountain near the town of "Yarim." During this period, they began to decline and fall. Their trade failed to a very great extent, firstly, because of the Nabetean domain over the north of Hijaz; secondly, because of the Roman superiority over the naval trade routes after the Roman conquest of Egypt, Syria and the north of Hijaz; and thirdly, because of inter-tribal warfare. Due to these factors, the families of Qahtan were disunited and scattered about all over Arabia.

After 300 C.C., the Himyarite Kingdom experienced a great deal of disorder and turmoil. The great many foreign and civil wars cost the people of Yemen their independence. During this era, the Aksumites invaded Tihama and Najran, making use of the constant intra-tribal conflict of Hamdan and Himyar. The Aksumite occupation of Tihama and Najran lasted until 378 C.C. Afterwards, Yemen expelled the Aksumites.

In the fifth century of the Christian calendar, several kings of Himyar are known to have converted to Judaism. The political context in which these conversions occurred centered on the position of Arabia between the competing empires of Christian Byzantium and Zoroastrian Persia. Neutrality, and good trade relations with both empires, was essential to the prosperity of the Arabian trade routes. It is theorized that the Himyarite kings choice of Judaism may have been an attempt at maintaining neutrality.

However, the conversion of Abu-Kariba was not an overt attempt to maintain neutrality but rather was a healing response.

Around 500 C.C., Abu-Kariba Assad, the King of Himyar, undertook a military expedition into northern Arabia in an effort to eliminate Byzantine influence. The Byzantine emperors had long eyed the Arabian Peninsula as a region in which to extend their influence, thereby to control the lucrative spice trade and the route to India. Without actually staging a conquest of the region, the Byzantines hoped to establish a protectorate over the pagan Arabs by converting them to Christianity. The cross would then bear commercial advantages as it did in Ethiopia. The Byzantines had made some progress in northern Arabia but had met with little success in Himyar.
Abu-Kariba’s forces reached Yathrib and, meeting no resistance and not expecting any treachery from the inhabitants, passed through the city, leaving a son of the king behind as governor. Scarcely had Abu-Kariba proceeded farther, when he received news that the people of Yathrib had killed his son. Smitten with grief, Abu-Kariba turned back in order to wreak bloody vengeance on the city. After cutting down the palm trees from which the inhabitants derived their main income, Abu-Kariba laid siege to the city.

The Jews of Yathrib fought side by side with pagan fellow inhabitants to defend their town and harried the besiegers with sudden sallies. During the siege, Abu-Kariba fell severely ill. Two Jewish scholars in Yathrib, Kaab and Assad by name, hearing of their enemy’s misfortune, called on the Abu-Kariba in his camp and used their knowledge of medicine to restore him to health. While attending Abu-Kariba, the Jews pleaded with Abu-Kariba to lift the siege and make peace.

The sages’ appeal is said to have persuaded Abu-Kariba . He called off his attack and also embraced Judaism along with his entire army. At his insistence, the two Jewish savants accompanied the Himyarite king back to his capital, where he demanded that all his people convert to Judaism.

Initially, there was great resistance. However, after an "ordeal" had justified the king’s demand and confirmed the "truth" of the Jewish faith, many Himyarites embraced Judaism. The conversions, however, were not total, and there remained as many pagans as Jews in the land.

Conversions, by ordeal, were not uncommon in Arabia. Some historians argue that the conversions occurred, not due to political motivations, but because Judaism, by its philosophical, simplistic and austere nature, was attractive to the nature of the Semitic people. In any event, it is known that by the sixth and seventh centuries of the Christian calendar, Judaism flourished in Himyar.

As for Abu-Kariba, his reign did not last long after his conversion to Judaism. His warlike nature prevented him from maintaining peace and prompted him to engage in bold enterprises. It is uncertain how Abu-Kariba met his death. However, some scholars believe that his own soldiers, worn out by constant campaigning, killed him.

After the demise of Abu-Kariba, a pagan named Dhu-Shanatir seized the throne.

**