Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Categories 13.8K
- General Category 10.9K
- General Announcements 184
- Faith Issues 3.4K
- Coptic Orthodox Church 2.5K
- Personal Issues 1.4K
- Prayer Requests 423
- Random Issues 1.8K
- Introductions 294
- Non-Orthodox Inquiries 232
- Youth Corner 606
- Hymns 2.5K
- Hymns Discussion 2.5K
- Technicial Difficulties 368
- Technical Topics 368
Joyous Psalm 150 for Communion
Can someone ask CIA while he's around where did he get this version from? It is different than HICS and M. tawfik etc...
Comments
Anywho, I do agree with you that CIA and Albair do chant it differently (I cannot find copies of Cantor Tawfik or Fr. Matthias) and I memorized it the way CIA chants it.
However, according to Albair's lessons on http://www.copticheritage.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=Classes&file=index (Click on "General Hymns for Feasts" and what I'm referring to is under "Psalm 150"), he notes that some cantors chant it the short way, which if you chant it that way, makes it a hymn all on its own, and that is the way that CIA chants it. However, Albair also notes that the words of Psalm 150 (first 4 Alleluias) were originally supposed to be chanted according to the Festive Sherat tune and that is the way he teaches it. Before he begins the first lesson, he does a little introduction to the hymn. I ask that you listen to it and share what you think because I have also wondered about this issue.
Personally, I think it is a matter of preference whether the psalm is chanted in the Festive Sherat tune or the other way.
I do have his number and I can ask him once I figure out a way to call him without getting long distance charges (maybe through magicjack or something... lol).
Please inform me what your research yields.
Dear kmeka,
I don't think it's subject to personal preference as you say, nor should be anything in the orthodox church actually. I didn't hear Mr. Albair's style, but if it's the same like Cantor Ibrahim then it's wrong, or at the very least controversial. The info I got is that he heard this in tanta or something and took it up to be authentic, but if you notice the sharat tune fits onto half the verse, not the whole of it which proves it to be very dodgy....
Oujai
BTW KMeka your posts are both a little bit of "falsafa" I just asked a question if someone could ask HIM and explain what HE says, not philosophizing and extrapolating your own ideas and things. Just the facts please.
On the version he has, he heard it from a cantor in Bani-sweif (i'll get his name later) who said the intro to the festive psalm that way. that was around 27 yrs ago. it took a while to search about it and to even get the name of the cantor (a blind one). He then spoke to cantor Gad about it and searched and he "remembered it", reviewed with the sherat of M.Mikhail (which is recorded) and only had problems into the transition (that quick jump) from the alli's to the response. he says that it took him a long time to remember and to confirm that transition part. when that happened, he recorded it, taught to the eklirekia chorus and then distributed in the Resurrection set.
I'll try to get the video of him commenting on this.
Im not talking about saying half of it. Im talking about the tune itself.
BTW KMeka your posts are both a little bit of "falsafa" I just asked a question if someone could ask HIM and explain what HE says, not philosophizing and extrapolating your own ideas and things. Just the facts please.
I do not see how I put my own views in this. I was merely just sharing what I found with regards to the issue you raised.
Dear Mina,
Are you saying you're satisfied by Cantor Ibrahim's explanation then? DOes that really sound authentic? I am not so sure...
Oujai
Ekhrestos anesty
Dear Mina,
Are you saying you're satisfied by Cantor Ibrahim's explanation then? DOes that really sound authentic? I am not so sure...
Oujai
first, let me tell you that HE KNOWS all what's being said about him and how ppl say that he made up ten-anastaseen (when it was first said) and this alleluia and many others.
Concerning el-ma'alem himself....let me tell you that i do believe what he says....i trust what he said about this hymn and many others. asl, as my dad likes to put it all the time, what will he gain from making up a hymn and saying it's not made up; fame?!...really?! you think he doesn't know that in today's world we can get the source of ANYTHING....so it would only be stupid of him to believe that he can get away with it. will he get more money?! nope.....because he have been losing money the day tasbeha.org was created....and one small lahn will not make someone buy the whole set especially in a society (egypt the last couple of yrs) where technology changed everything and have spread in every way do to the corruption in the society (where ppl really have nothing else to do in their lives other than use the internet, use mp3 players.....other things that are always being updated and they havn't became bored of yet). I trust the guy because i have met him...i prayed with him and heard from him stories (personal ones to) where i don't see any of the "bad" characteristics ppl mention about him.
Concerning accepting the hymn in general: i always have this belief: let us keep about every bit of what we have of alhan (with any skepticism) and try to search for the lost. i accept the hymn because IT IS possible that this is the same hymn m.Ibrahim did hear. i am not as skeptic when it comes to hymns....yes i would like to learn as much information as possible about a hymn, but i would never disapprove because there is a chance of it being made up.
ophadece, i know you are mostly skeptic about many things in our Church. I think sometimes you sound that you believe in absolutism where there is the need to be very strong evidence for something to be accepted. hehe, a friend in the convention had many small questions that are known for Ibrahim Ayad and he goes, "i am like a machine" and i have told him that's exactly what we must not be as deacons and servants. our Church is static to some certain extent.....but otherwise very dynamic. we must not become machines who just run code (0 and 1) and if any one bit is wrong the machine breaks down. We only have bits of what we had many decades ago. anything new to add to that where there is the LEAST possibility of authenticity is acceptable for me......but who am i other than a sinful person.
[quote author=ophadece link=topic=11487.msg138402#msg138402 date=1306105439]
Ekhrestos anesty
Dear Mina,
Are you saying you're satisfied by Cantor Ibrahim's explanation then? DOes that really sound authentic? I am not so sure...
Oujai
first, let me tell you that HE KNOWS all what's being said about him and how ppl say that he made up ten-anastaseen (when it was first said) and this alleluia and many others.
Concerning el-ma'alem himself....let me tell you that i do believe what he says....i trust what he said about this hymn and many others. asl, as my dad likes to put it all the time, what will he gain from making up a hymn and saying it's not made up; fame?!...really?! you think he doesn't know that in today's world we can get the source of ANYTHING....so it would only be stupid of him to believe that he can get away with it. will he get more money?! nope.....because he have been losing money the day tasbeha.org was created....and one small lahn will not make someone buy the whole set especially in a society (egypt the last couple of yrs) where technology changed everything and have spread in every way do to the corruption in the society (where ppl really have nothing else to do in their lives other than use the internet, use mp3 players.....other things that are always being updated and they havn't became bored of yet). I trust the guy because i have met him...i prayed with him and heard from him stories (personal ones to) where i don't see any of the "bad" characteristics ppl mention about him.
Concerning accepting the hymn in general: i always have this belief: let us keep about every bit of what we have of alhan (with any skepticism) and try to search for the lost. i accept the hymn because IT IS possible that this is the same hymn m.Ibrahim did hear. i am not as skeptic when it comes to hymns....yes i would like to learn as much information as possible about a hymn, but i would never disapprove because there is a chance of it being made up.
ophadece, i know you are mostly skeptic about many things in our Church. I think sometimes you sound that you believe in absolutism where there is the need to be very strong evidence for something to be accepted. hehe, a friend in the convention had many small questions that are known for Ibrahim Ayad and he goes, "i am like a machine" and i have told him that's exactly what we must not be as deacons and servants. our Church is static to some certain extent.....but otherwise very dynamic. we must not become machines who just run code (0 and 1) and if any one bit is wrong the machine breaks down. We only have bits of what we had many decades ago. anything new to add to that where there is the LEAST possibility of authenticity is acceptable for me......but who am i other than a sinful person.
What do you mean when he says "I am like a machine?"
Thanks Mina for say this because I some how have the same feeling even though I have not met him. But what do you mean when he says "I am like a machine?"
A machine can malfunction from the smallest problem. as i said, a differnt bit (0 or 1) can make all the difference into a program. compare this to the huge argument we had before about 3 or 4 hazzas in tobhina.........that one hazza (or even jump) effects the person.....but it shouldn't....it's just a hazza. yes, under certain circumstances this needs to be dealt with, but not to the point that the person would be saying this cantor is wrong because he recorded an extra hazza (or really mixed a hazza with another).
we are not machines--autonomous entities who just act as they are instructed/programed. we must have a heart, a soul and a mind to feel and know what we are doing.
Dear Mina,
Why do I get the impression that your undertone is so defensive for cantor Ibrahim? I even thought in psychological terms I can call it paranoia on his behalf. This is wrong. As a friend of mine who I admire and appreciate, I ask you not to fall in this trap. Cantor Ibrahim is only human. He makes mistakes. His words are not gospel. If anything, being a high rank in the church he should be debated and sometimes even attacked, and as a humble person he should be able to defend himself with proof. Let him defend himself, and don't you try to do that for him.
Then, what is this talk about him knowing what is said about him? Does he? Well, good for him. He should then act on that, shouldn't he? You said the same thing about Mr. Albair knowing about copyright breach issues, and that is also good for him.
Then again: cantor Ibrahim losing money because of tasbeha.org? Is he really? Even then, you can't be the one who says that. I never thought you agreed with that practice in the first place, or did you? I thought we shared the same viewpoint on this topic in particular. Well, no more comments.
Back to the major topic of being no machine. Mina, my dear, I am not a machine, nor are you, nor is anybody. Does that give us an excuse to do what we wish on a whim and caprice? Hazza or not hazza, I respect very much, and you don't seem to. Why? Because I am a beginner. If cantor Ibrahim, being not a machine comes up to sing the seven tunes in two different styles, is that good? Is that worthy of him being called (and I think you know it well) "kabeer mo3allemy el kaneesa el qebteya" (= senior cantor of the Coptic Orthodox Church)? If cantor Gad, Zaher, HICS, and Mr. Wagdi (and Mr. Albair of course) record some hymns different to him, does that make him better, or less? We have brains to think with. We have logic to follow. He recorded the seven tunes twice in two different styles, and when I learnt it the first time, every body in teh church said it another way, and they were looking at me in disdain (hehe... not so disrespectfully, just surprised I would say), and I went back and found cantor Gad, cantor Zaher, HCOC (obviously some of the verses are missing from HICS collection, and you may recall I asked you about them for that reason some time ago, although not sure I stated the reason) recorded it the way it was sung in the church... what is that? To me: that is inconsistency! Well, yes we are not machines, but that doesn't mean we give ourselves an excuse to be inconsistent. As a matter of fact, someone of his rank should do better, don't you agree? Or just do things, and then find excuses for them? No, that doesn't sound right to me.
That is what I mainly believe in: consistency. You cannot go to one church and find a different practice during Lenten weekdays, or Lenten weekends, or whatever. You may find minor differences as in some people ignorant of what should be sung on an annual Friday, when they may sing be'eish, rather than a watos doxology for instance. That is understandable but to me not even good enough. Why? Because what you said I think borders on being very true: Orthodoxy means absolutism. I guess you know something about the term relativism, since you do the former, and you know exactly how relativism brought catastrophes to every kind of principle and concept we have as humans, not least "political correctness" and tolerance of others. Orthodoxy means absolutism and we should strive harder to achieve what Our Mother teaches us full stop.
Lastly, the joyous intro to psalm 150 that cantor Ibrahim recorded is wrong, as is the sha'anini intro.
God have mercy on us all and pray for us a lot...
Oujai
khrestos anesty
Dear Mina,
Why do I get the impression that your undertone is so defensive for cantor Ibrahim? I even thought in psychological terms I can call it paranoia on his behalf. This is wrong. As a friend of mine who I admire and appreciate, I ask you not to fall in this trap. Cantor Ibrahim is only human. He makes mistakes. His words are not gospel. If anything, being a high rank in the church he should be debated and sometimes even attacked, and as a humble person he should be able to defend himself with proof. Let him defend himself, and don't you try to do that for him.
Then, what is this talk about him knowing what is said about him? Does he? Well, good for him. He should then act on that, shouldn't he? You said the same thing about Mr. Albair knowing about copyright breach issues, and that is also good for him.
Then again: cantor Ibrahim losing money because of tasbeha.org? Is he really? Even then, you can't be the one who says that. I never thought you agreed with that practice in the first place, or did you? I thought we shared the same viewpoint on this topic in particular. Well, no more comments.
Back to the major topic of being no machine. Mina, my dear, I am not a machine, nor are you, nor is anybody. Does that give us an excuse to do what we wish on a whim and caprice? Hazza or not hazza, I respect very much, and you don't seem to. Why? Because I am a beginner. If cantor Ibrahim, being not a machine comes up to sing the seven tunes in two different styles, is that good? Is that worthy of him being called (and I think you know it well) "kabeer mo3allemy el kaneesa el qebteya" (= senior cantor of the Coptic Orthodox Church)? If cantor Gad, Zaher, HICS, and Mr. Wagdi (and Mr. Albair of course) record some hymns different to him, does that make him better, or less? We have brains to think with. We have logic to follow. He recorded the seven tunes twice in two different styles, and when I learnt it the first time, every body in teh church said it another way, and they were looking at me in disdain (hehe... not so disrespectfully, just surprised I would say), and I went back and found cantor Gad, cantor Zaher, HCOC (obviously some of the verses are missing from HICS collection, and you may recall I asked you about them for that reason some time ago, although not sure I stated the reason) recorded it the way it was sung in the church... what is that? To me: that is inconsistency! Well, yes we are not machines, but that doesn't mean we give ourselves an excuse to be inconsistent. As a matter of fact, someone of his rank should do better, don't you agree? Or just do things, and then find excuses for them? No, that doesn't sound right to me.
That is what I mainly believe in: consistency. You cannot go to one church and find a different practice during Lenten weekdays, or Lenten weekends, or whatever. You may find minor differences as in some people ignorant of what should be sung on an annual Friday, when they may sing be'eish, rather than a watos doxology for instance. That is understandable but to me not even good enough. Why? Because what you said I think borders on being very true: Orthodoxy means absolutism. I guess you know something about the term relativism, since you do the former, and you know exactly how relativism brought catastrophes to every kind of principle and concept we have as humans, not least "political correctness" and tolerance of others. Orthodoxy means absolutism and we should strive harder to achieve what Our Mother teaches us full stop.
Lastly, the joyous intro to psalm 150 that cantor Ibrahim recorded is wrong, as is the sha'anini intro.
God have mercy on us all and pray for us a lot...
Oujai
ophadece, I agree with you on some of the aspects that Orthodoxy means Absolutism; however, there are some things that should be clarified. First, is that although Orthodoxy means Absolutism, it should only be that way for the main aspects of the Orthodox faith (e.g. Christ's Divinity, Virginity of the Theotokos (basically any heresy that the fathers of the church stood up for)). The core issues that if left to relativism, the Coptic Church would crumble.
That being said, like someone mentioned earlier, what will Cantor Ayad gain or lose for coming with a new hymn as some people say he does? Fame? He already has that. Money? I hear he is very well off financially. He stated who his source was and explained his reasoning for chanting the Joyous Psalm 150 Introduction the way he does.
Concerning what you argue about him being inconsistent, I would not consider that he is inconsistent but rather fixed it up a little. If you do not agree with me, consider medical research for example when several decades ago, there was no known cure for cancer. Everyone grew to that understanding up until a few years ago that chemotherapy and other alternatives were proposed. Now a credible source can come up and argue that chemotherapy is not a good alternative because it causes fatigue and hair loss for instance; however, chemotherapy is still in use. Same with this issue, Cantor Ayad may have recorded a specific hymn in a specific way; however, after researching it, he may have corrected it. This is not wrong because as in the medical research example, scientists corrected their thinking and found that a cure was available. Now, you come and back up your reasoning with a different source than Cantor Ibrahim's. This doesn't mean it is wrong, just different and it is okay because just like any other subject, there will be different opinions that having a proper background and evidence may not be completely wrong. If you would like a specific example, you can consider Deacon Albair with his different source and teaching about the Joyous Psalm 150 Introduction. His source is Cantor Mikhail, which is not wrong. All in all, that is why I said in an earlier post, it is a matter of preference. I say this because this is not a fundamental faith of the Coptic Orthodox Church. As Bishop Serapion, bishop of Southern California, says "hymns is not a goal, it is a means.
I'm not saying you are wrong because there are instances for hymns that an absolute is required.
That being said, I would like to ask you a few questions:
1. What were the two recordings of the Seven Tunes Hymn from Cantor Ayad that were not consistent?
2. What are the Grand Melismatic Joyous and Sha'nini Introductions to Psalm 150 that you referring to other than Cantor Ibrahim's?
Ekhrestos anesty
Dear Mina,
Why do I get the impression that your undertone is so defensive for cantor Ibrahim? I even thought in psychological terms I can call it paranoia on his behalf. This is wrong. As a friend of mine who I admire and appreciate, I ask you not to fall in this trap. Cantor Ibrahim is only human. He makes mistakes. His words are not gospel. If anything, being a high rank in the church he should be debated and sometimes even attacked, and as a humble person he should be able to defend himself with proof. Let him defend himself, and don't you try to do that for him.
hehe.........i am not saying the guys is a god, i am not saying he doesn't make mistakes (he actually did a couple when he was teaching us). he is always debated and attcked and he does admit that to us but always says that it shouldn't stop anyone from doing what they know to be right.
i wasn't really defending him.....i don't think he would defend himself (in in this position) by what i am giving you here. but i had to say this to explain why do i actually believe him and satisfied with the answer that he gave.
in general, talk is talk......if it benefits it will be taken in consideration....if not, than it's just talk: tetla' min wedn we teroh lel-tanya. i know he is. around 15 yrs ago (maybe more--when i was not in the states) my church had a deal to make tapes of his recordings and distribute in the states. that got him money. then the deal was broken and we stopped. ppl were just making money by making copies of his tapes and selling them without paying him loyalty. then he made the deal with Adel & Saad Inc. Oh...i didn't say i agree.....i still stand for all the stuff we do here on tasbeha.org.....that verse in my signature will always be there. but i am saying that money is not a factor here.
ok. consistency.....in what exactly?! alhan, or text, or what....if in alhan, consistency in what? tunes, hazzat, tarkeep.....if tunes, then that needs to be consistent.....if hazzat, than that changes and impossible to have because things will always be recorded differently in some way or another. so here that consistency you asked for is lower......now in tarkeep. that really changes because many people can rakeep differnt. many mu'alamin will do so. you just proves that by telling us about el-saba' tarayeek......his tarkeep was differnt. i refuse to take that as a valid statement to live with. you can say that there are absolute things in Orthodoxy but not define it to be absolute all the time. there are too much examples i can begin to list outside the range of hymns....but i would not get into that. if you would like to think so.
Dear kmeka001,
I may not be able to answer all your comments or arguments, but please bear with me, and repeat them if you found me having missed some. First of all, to me hymnody is a core part of the faith. In fact, I will argue that the way Coptic Orthodox Church preserved the faith for us was through hymnody teaching the illiterate and unlearned monks and deacons to learn hymns by heart through musical rhythm and rhyme, and learn the faith by heart. They couldn't read the Bible. They couldn't argue with patristic comments, let alone understand them, but through hymnody they were able to understand in simplicity. I get the feeling you don't live in Egypt, because of what I am going to say right now: you don't really know anything about die-hard Copts (I am trying to simulate them really, not that I am 1 or even 10% of the way they act and debate). You of course know that in Egypt, there is a big movement of Protestant bands, and singers who are changing tunes, and words to the solidly inherited Coptic Christian songs. You know what? Some churches (as you may be aware) strongly oppose singing a Christian song in a tune that emerged either from, or at the time, this wave started. Yes, to that extent. Not even wording, but just the tune. To me this is plausible, and not far-fetched by any means. How much more should this apply to Orthodox hymnody?
Ok, to the second point. Hymnody with all due respect to yourself is not like scientific research. Mr. Ragheb Moftah's efforts were greatly appreciated, and accoladed by the Coptic church so that we follow them as THE source. Obviously HICS may have changed some notations (hazzat) of some hymns, and they may have recorded hymns a bit differently (as is the case with psalm 151), but here is when our brain should start working, and logic should prevail. We should do our own research and between ourselves as deacons in one church approve of one style and sing it. Now, you will start asking is that not related by any means to scientific research? Well, it may be, but we don't make things up, or finally discover something that was not discovered for ages by the former sources. To me, for a hymn to start propagating in the 1980's or 1990's it is questionable. So my point is as long as we have a source, decent enough, old enough, why innovate? I can not judge Cantor Ibrahim's motives, but for whatever reason his teaching doesn't sit right with me. Have you heard that new style of Kiahkly Adam taodokeya? If so, please tell me how many people took it up as a practice?
Thirdly, consistency. If you are not consistent, why teach? If you are not consistent why record CD's? It is a very grave flaw I see in someone's credibility (not cantor Ibrahim necessarily), to record something they are not sure of? How come? Why? Is it that easy? Just a microphone in front of your mouth and you drift with your mind into the hymn, and that is it? Hehe... no... that is not it. In fact, Mr. Wagdi even made a mistake in the second alleluja of the feast of the Cross (I think) aspasmos watos. I was very disappointed, but I am more than 100% sure that when people sing it on his style, or any other, or he himself does, won't sing it the way he recorded it because he made a mistake! That is another argument though, because I respect Mr. Wagdi and think he has different aims, which I respect.
Fourthly, and lastly, (1) I honestly can't remember where I found them, but I believe, although I am not 100% sure that it is the seven tunes of Nativity on this site (I deleted it from my collection, so can't claim that I will make sure if it is), as compared to seven tunes of Resurrection (I didn't find his on this website, but can't remember where I got it from), compared to cantor Gad's, and cantor Zaher's - if not here, then alhan.youth-bishopric.com; the only other sites I got some hymns from were, ibrahimayad.com and alhan.org (was a long time ago, so I can't even remember if these are the names of the websites. (2) I don't think there is a long psalm 150 sha'anini intro, and that was made up. I never heard it anywhere, and don't think we should say it (if you want, you can fit the tune to the mohayer for the first couple of verses, but that is just about it for me). By the way, as a general rule for occasions (not annual) psalm 150 is treated as two watos verses where you can fit the mohayer and the fast tune on, but the introduction is always different - annual, Kiahkly, joyous. In fact, you start wondering if we actually lost the tunes or what, because for the former two the verses don't follow any other watos tune!!!!! Not sure...
Dear Mina,
Fitting tunes.. fitting tunes.. fitting tunes? tarkeeb is a word you don't mention on this forum whenever I have participated in a thread please. I don't believe in it one small bit... never ever... There is nothing called tarkeeb. As I pointed out above, there is THE source for most of the hymns, and that is HICS who recorded 70 - 75% of the hymns of occasions. Mr. Wagdi recorded "nikhora" so that is THE source. Two versions of Lazarus' Communion hymns, with logic cantor Wagdi's version is right. Two versions for adawan niskhai, on research and logic, cantor Gad's and cantor Ibrahim's are right, as opposed to what Mr. Wagdi and cantor Farag did.
I will tell you what tarkeeb did to the hymns, and now I live in a small church in England, unlike you where you have a large chorus who meet up regularly for hymns practice (although I am sure you may have had, or still have the same problem). Some people say the long psalm 150 annual in a different tune to both cantor Gad and cantor Ibrahim. In fact, the latter says it differently to the former. Well, why on earth did I choose that example? That hymn is a made up hymn anyway... sorry. You listen to bebnewma of Cantor Ibrahim and the chorus, and in three places it is not in concord with HICS. The first place: "ho" of "niahow". The second "di" of "dibandakoste". The third is the connecting part of "ou" in "darou" in the third stanza (stakhon). Another hymn bashois for resurrection, himself and the chorus, they disagree in that part of where to start "em" of "emmahshomd". Third example (or fourth) ounishdi; no two cantors agree on how it should be sung. These are to me grave mistakes: arrogance, unleardness, freestyling, disrespect for the earlier... and many other things. In case you start thinking I am none of these, I am making my own notations now on some hymns that I don't agree with with HICS. But I always tell myself, if I am going to sing it in the church, I will learn them the HICS way, and just do this for my leisure... hehe... nothing more.
But just one point to add to finish: I can understand tarkeeb for Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday taodokeya's - the penultimate parts of such on "aradantondi" (even though I am aware cantor Zaher recorded them, but don't know if we all agree it will be our source in the future, maybe one day), some hidan and verses of cymbals verses (the uncommon saints), etc etc, but long hymns? Well, maybe aspasmos watos and adam for Entry to Egypt, Entry into the Temple, even though Cantor Wagdi recorded most, if not all of them...
Oujai
Fitting tunes.. fitting tunes.. fitting tunes? tarkeeb is a word you don't mention on this forum whenever I have participated in a thread please. I don't believe in it one small bit... never ever... There is nothing called tarkeeb.
i am sorry to say this.....but you just lost all respect from me.
without tarkeep, almost all of our tasbeha hymns are out of the question CONSIDERING that scholars and academics consider the psaltery to be our greatest asset of hymnology rather hymns that we say in occasion. not only that but they actually set many of the tunes of the liturgy. all done through tarkeep. that number is simply tooo high if you consider the recordings of the chorus in HICS rather than the cantors woh recorded with them. 'with logic'?!...our logic hatakhodna warra el-shams. the hymn is said to be in differnt tunes in differnt books. and even though, it was all tarkeep. actually, the opposite is true because ma'allem Mikhail records it like m.Farag. lol...i haven't researched about it but I'll try to rememeber to ask Ibrahim Ayad. the hymn is not easy and confusing.....i expect differnces between cantors. onishto of lent? well OF COURSE......because they are differnt tarkeep. i don't need to. we have recordings of m.Fahim (for all 4 days i think) and m.Tawfik (for 2 days). so wait.......you denied tarkeep exists but proved it through all the examples you just provided...instead of helping your argument you just proved mine.
No Mina. I am sorry I wasn't clear enough in my first post. Yes, most of if not all of the tunes we have today from HICS were done through fitting the tune... tarkeeb (and why the "p" by the way? you speak Arabic, don't you?). But since that point, tarkeeb shouldn't come into the equation except for uncommon hymns on occasions not recorded by HICS, or sources that are credible for other hymns. I actually said it before you, when I was arguing tarkeeb for tasbeha hymns, ie taodokeyas. I wasn't actually aware that cantor Fahim, or cantor Towfik recorded the penultimate verses of the other three watos days.
As for edawan niskhai, with all due respect to cantor Mikhail, seems he is wrong as well. Why I am saying this, is only based on what you say, that the first verse of the hymn is rather like an ewsheya verse (ie not subject to counting to the syllables, or whatever you want to call it... henek in Coptic (I believe)). The second verse is the watos verse composed of four proper watos stanzas, each between 8 - 10 henekat (ideally 7 - 9 by definition).
Oujai
No Mina. I am sorry I wasn't clear enough in my first post. Yes, most of if not all of the tunes we have today from HICS were done through fitting the tune... tarkeeb (and why the "p" by the way? you speak Arabic, don't you?).dono...i just wrote it that way. it's a hymn....we expect it not to be an awsheya hymn. that's why pi-epnevma have it's on introduction before before as-shopi and the paralex, that's why we think the new proposed o-oniatk is more accurate than the one abouna ash'eia recorded, that's why afrek etfe have the first part in a special way, and much of other hymns that have paralexes.
i am sorry.....but you do really puzzle me...........you say you believe in HICS tarkeeb but not others. in the case of etav-ennieskhai, we have a credible source but you choose to put your studies over that sources even thoo that studies and hymns can't go together because you can't but a hymn (tune) on paper to study; you can only hear it and recorded and teach--that's how our hymns are handed down.
you see how you dig yourself out of a hole and fall into another one......
Hehe... Mina, that's right, you got my core..."fa2asteny"... I think it's fair to say I took your advice long ago and compare hymns from different cantors till I get convinced by one teaching. I also use my logic, and the things I learnt in the past. So all in all I don't take anything at face value even from HICS.
Oujai
Ekhrestos anesty
Hehe... Mina, that's right, you got my core..."fa2asteny"... I think it's fair to say I took your advice long ago and compare hymns from different cantors till I get convinced by one teaching. I also use my logic, and the things I learnt in the past. So all in all I don't take anything at face value even from HICS.
Oujai
ok then......so it's all based on preference. i can accept your logic behind your choice but i don't have to believe in it. i can never be forced to do so. so i just ask for you to consider that when you write on the post.
Dear Mina,
How did you reach the conclusion it's based on preference? I research, compare, and use logic.
Oujai
Ekhrestos anesty
Dear Mina,
How did you reach the conclusion it's based on preference? I research, compare, and use logic.
Oujai
your research and logic can be limited to your own self.....as mine may be sometimes. but that's why i am always open for talk except for obvious things. i don't know everything and i can never do a "perfect research" to conclude something solid about our hymns.
Good point Mina. So I guess you can call it a personal experience, or personal opinion, rather than preference. It is not a preference and should not be a preference, as I maintained in my reply to kmeka001.
Oujai
Ekhrestos anesty
Good point Mina. So I guess you can call it a personal experience, or personal opinion, rather than preference. It is not a preference and should not be a preference, as I maintained in my reply to kmeka001.
Oujai
it should not be....but it is. personal opinion and experience shouldn't be acted upon until it becomes a prefernce......which you are doing.
Dear Mina,
I don't know why it's difficult for you to make a distinction between preference and personal experience, or conclusion. Well my preference may certainly be to say Lazarus Saturday Communion hymn in be'eish tune, but personal conclusion shows it to be wrong. My preference may be to sing sha'anini psalm 150 intro on the sharat, but I won't. Hope you get my point already...
Oujai
Ekhrestos anesty
Dear Mina,
I don't know why it's difficult for you to make a distinction between preference and personal experience, or conclusion. Well my preference may certainly be to say Lazarus Saturday Communion hymn in be'eish tune, but personal conclusion shows it to be wrong. My preference may be to sing sha'anini psalm 150 intro on the sharat, but I won't. Hope you get my point already...
Oujai
from m-w.com
pref·er·ence noun \ˈpre-fərn(t)s, ˈpre-f(ə-)rən(t)s\
1 a : the act of preferring : the state of being preferred
b : the power or opportunity of choosing
when i say preference, i mean preference to who to follow rather than preference to what to say from your own will........not much of us have that "opportunity" (as the definition above) to choose what to say.
THAnks dear Unworthy1. I can still see Mina's definition, but in all honesty I think I am talking more along your lines than him. ALl in all preference, personal opinion, conclusion doesn't matter as long as there's a church chorus and they agree on what and which to follow. Sad to say, but true...
OUjai
he speaks about the festive alli of psalm 150 in it.