Skip to the content
Icon of Christ
› ›

Festive Introduction to the Difnar

Faithfull Servant 1
edited January 2014 in Hymns Discussion
I was wandering if anyone knew anything about the festive intro to the difnar that Coptic Reader mentions? If anyone has a recording of it too that would be great!

God Bless

Comments

  • RemnkemiRemnkemi
    It is the same tune as the Kiahk's Exposition/Commentary of the Doers. Both hymns have a long and a short way (the long way is the Exposition of the Doers tune). It is recorded by HCOC and many cantors. Ibrahim Ayad says it for the Resurrection feast commentary "Chioowini" which is said after the sermon while the Pope is greeting political dignitaries. You may be able to find it on youtube.
  • Faithfull Servant 1
    edited January 2014
    Thanks a lot, and I did some digging and found them online:



    But what I noticed is that both sources don't say the long intro as in Chioooini or Pikristos Penswtyr, Is it still right to say it the long way on them?

    God Bless
  • minatasgeelminatasgeel
    Let me clarify some things...first, the 2 recordings are of the SAME tune, one is m Tawfik and the other is M Faheem. I wouldn't be surprised if M Fahim learned it from m Tawfik.

    So the different tunes of commentaries and the difnar, since it always follows the commentaries tune (otherwise its just annual)--we lost MANY of those tune and don'e have much of them. I don't wanna list all of them here....but about the festive tune, Chi-oinee is the commentary of the Day of the Resurrection. It is to be said after the gospel on the feast's liturgy, which is on a sunday, which makes that commentary an adam one. In nahdet elkanayes khidmit, says that it is to be said like Tarh elfa'ala of Kiahk, which is also an adam commentary (makes sense). That tune is not lost, we have a recording. It has like 2-3 min of hazzat and then the parts are constructed. the recordings above is tarh elfa3la without that 2-3 min of hazzat and that was recorded and handed down and was/is chanted by many (myself many times in church because it's easy). M Ibrahim in the 2010 Easter liturgy rakeep tarh elfa'a way on chi-o-oinee, which it is supposed to be said in: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gau9UfHeey8. ALL of this, is just for the Adam commentaries. now for watos, we know NOTHING!!! and i would love for Albair or someone to provide us a source or a recording or even a teaching (modern or ancient) on what is the way/tune for the watos festive commentary tune. 

  • Faithfull Servant 1
    Oh... well since the watos one isn't legit what do we say instead? But the adam one is legit... right?

    God Bless
  • minatasgeelminatasgeel
    I would say the annual watos one until someone replies with someone info....i am not really a search and i never do enough research to conclude that 'there exists no watos tune'
  • drewhalim
    From what I have seen from muallimeen in Cairo during festive periods they chant the Adam and Watos both in the tar7 el fa3la tune. I don't know their source suffice to say most Likely Didymus Institute.
  • minatasgeelminatasgeel
    well adam and watos text is different. i believe watos always has more syllables. it doesn't make sense to use the same tune accept if you are saying the SAME tarh through all those days. so if the tarh is an adam one, the adam tune would always work.
  • drewhalim
    There is no disputing that generally speaking Adam and Watos are different. However there is a similar scenario on Palm Sunday where the Watos commentary from vespers is also used during Matins on Sunday morning. There is simply no Adam Hosanna tune around just like there is no Watos festal tune in existence.
  • Faithfull Servant 1
    Makes sense but I agree, If the syllable structure is different then there should be a different tune to suit them so I think there should be another tune for watos difnar in farahy or else the tune wont work too well on the amount of syllables there are, (have you ever tried saying a watos psali in an adam tune... it doesn't work.) With Palm Sunday and Feast of the Cross, correct me I'm wrong, there is a set text for the expositions with a set tune that works, so it doesn't matter whether it is adam or watos the tune for the expositions will always work on the text of the Feasts because they don't change over the days (i.e the exposition is always the same) likewise with the tune. So what I'm getting at is that the texts don't change so the tune doesn't need to, however in Farahy the texts in fact do change and the mode they are in (watos or adam). So there definitely should be a watos ferahy tune out there. But if it is lost, if it sounds nice and works on watos sentence structure then why not use the adam ferahy tune? But if it does sound shocking and doesn't work out alright I reackon just stick to annual as Mina suggested or alternatively mabey we can use the Palm Sunday exposition tune, seeing they have a watos sentence structure the tune would work.

    Or we can just scrap everything and just read out the difnar :p ... whatever works

    God Bless
  • minatasgeelminatasgeel
    @drewhalim....i don't know if i spoke to you about this before or not. but Palm sunday commentary has an adam and watos. the current book everyone uses, Epsaliat wa Turuhat, 1 or 2 edition, does not have coptic text for the adam but i have found it elsewhere even though it just says 'wa laho aydan' rather than it being adam. So the text exists but the tune is lost. and btw, the only source for mashenak is m Fahim...possibly made up or extracted from the sha'anini sherat.....not that i we don't say it, we do every time :-). so it's not really an exception but simply the same issue.

    One thing i found though, i saw chi-o-oinee text in books and it is titled to be a watos commentary. I think I have been mistaken all this time and calling it an adam. but than it's weird because the commentary of bright saturday is watos and it is to be chanted in chi-o-oinee tune. 

    just too much confusion......anyone has any knowledge about commentaries in old manuscripts?

  • RemnkemiRemnkemi
    I will check some old manuscripts. Keep in mind, Chiooni is not only said during Resurrection feast liturgy. It is also said for the Resurrection psalmody (it is one of the added commentaries) and I believe the added parts of Resurrection psalmody was said throughout the 50 days. So theoretically, if you had a Wed-Sat liturgy, one would do the entire Resurrection psalmody with all the additional parts, including chiooni.

    I think the commentaries (ie, the difnar) is a late development which included a breakdown between Adam and Batos days with respective tunes. But I also think some turuhat (maybe doxology is a better word) were very famous and said all the time regardless of the day of the week. When these turuhat were added to the difnar, they fell into Adam or Batos days inconsistently. This is only a theory that needs more research. There is a Copt in the Netherlands who is doing his Phd on the difnar. I will check his work also.

    I think as it stands, the festive difnar/turuhat is said in one tune applied to all days of the week.
  • minatasgeelminatasgeel
    @Remnkemi...I don't totally agree. That specific tarh is only for that evening liturgy and then there are a commentary for every week that is to be said. now for the whole special psalmody, with the psalies, commentaries and the hoos, I strongly disagree with idea of saying them though all days. This goes for the Lent one to especially since in both psalmodies there are 2 sets (adam and watos) for all days. For lent, you do all the special psalies only on sundays and weekdays just those 2 regular psalies before the theotokia. For the Fifties, There are definitely 2 that are to be used during the entire whole fifties and the special psalies to be said only on the Eve of the Feast. I can "tolerate" saying them also on sundays but i can't accept saying them on weekdays.

    As for the commentaries and difnar, i do see the connection you are trying to make and i did see it when i was editing the natvity psalmody (the paramoun ones atleast)--i saw many of the commentaries taken from the difnar with some extra or missing parts. But i do not see it in all the commentaries that are in recent books. 
  • RemnkemiRemnkemi
    Mina,
    Just for clarification, I was talking about certain things I've seen in old manuscripts and Ibn Kabar's, The Lamp. I was not talking about current practice. Current practice has become more standardized but it wasn't like this prior to 18th-19th century. I did not mean to advocate we should pray the festal psalmodies with the additional parts every week as it seems to have been done centuries before. This practice has been changed too. I simply wanted to show that the result of splitting commentaries/expositions into Adam and Batos has some inconsistency, especially the tunes for certain feast expositions that have been lost.
  • minatasgeelminatasgeel
    Ok :-)
  • RemnkemiRemnkemi
    I just reviewed HICS Theophany recordings with Fr Metias. He does the Adam difnar as annual and the Batos as the "fast joyous" tune (i.e., not Kiahk Commentary of the Doers).  From the evidence so far, the festive tune is Batos only and there is no Joyous Adam tune. 

    I will also add that in my research of Ibn Kabar, he opposed calling the concept of "seasonal tunes". He writes, 
    “And the praise that comes after the Hoos [the Third Hoos], is called Batos in all shades at all times”. In another passage concerning the Batos Lobsh, he writes, “It is, as the conclusion of the SaturdayTheotokia, the psali Ⲭⲉⲣⲉ ⲑⲏⲉⲑⲙⲉϩ ⲛ̀ϩ̀ⲙⲟⲧ (Shere the ethmeh enehmot) to the end. And its tones, [follow] the rules[which] are rules for the Batos tone, [which] are happy, happy and sad, sad. It is the Nativity, Kiahk, and the Pentecost known tones.” Abu ‘l-Barakat disapproved of using terminology such as the “Joyous ⲧⲉⲛⲟⲩⲱⲉϩ ⲛ̀ⲥⲱⲕ(Tenoweh ensok)” or the “Kiahk ⲧⲉⲛⲟⲩⲱⲉϩ ⲛ̀ⲥⲱⲕ(Tenoweh ensok)” instead of the appropriate “Batos ⲧⲉⲛⲟⲩⲱⲉϩ ⲛ̀ⲥⲱⲕ (Tenouweh ensok)”.

    Here we can see that Batos is irrespective of season (and possibly the day of the week). Following your comments on Palm Sunday Commentary/Tahr, it seems all turuhat were Batos with respect to the tunes (not one tune) but later Batos indicated day of the week rather than tune so the Adam tarn was added with the annual tune only.
  • Daniel_Kyrillos
    I'm very confused about this... Here's what me, someone who has never heard Chi-o-oinee or the Doers Commentary before, got.

    1- There is no festive Adam commentary.
    2- The festive commentary is Watos only. It is NOT the Kiahk Commentary of the Doers tune. That's 3 commentary tunes.
    3- Chi-o-oinee is Watos, but not festive, but said in a festive time..?

    I'm very lost... @minatasgeel please help D:
  • anba_antoniosanba_antonios
    edited November 2016
    Chi-o-oinee is the text for the Feast of Resurrection liturgy exposition (tar7). It talks about the enlightment of israel due to the resurrection of the risen christ. It is to be said in the tune of the exposition of the doers.

    There are two melismatic tunes for the ceremonial expositions (festal, lenten, kiahky, etc- where there is an occasion related to christ where the mention of life of saints is not appropraite due to focus on Christ.)

    First one is the Watos exposition said usually during the Vespers praise and it has a distinctive tune that is called "El tarh el kebeer" which is the same tune of the grand melismatic Teoi en-hikanos

    There is also an Adam exposition and the tune is referred to as " the exposition of the doers." Theoretically, the tune can be recited at any cermonial occasion where an exposition is more appropriate than the difnar (antiphonarium).

    The exposition of the doers is just a generalized text that can be said on all sundays (you can think of it as the Sotem Ta-shiri of kiahk expositions), however most Kiahk Psalmodys have dedicated texts for every Kiahk Sunday.

    On annual (non-ceremonial) days the Adam Antiphorium/ Watos Antiphonarium are recited in their known tunes.

    Please pray for me
  • minatasgeelminatasgeel
    @Daniel_Kyrillos...we tend to set the facts that we know and see in books and recordings, then theorize on how we got to there :-)
    Here is what we know and do now in church:
    1-Tarh elfa3alla is the adam commentary said on sunday evenings in Kiahk--there is a recording for the part before last
    2-El-tarh el-kebeer is a watos commentary, and the tune is recorded (actually the intro is the lahn rather than the commentary itself--just to complicate things a bit more)
    3-Chi-o-oinee is the watos commentary of the Resurrection feast eve (to be said in the liturgy of the feast) and it is to be chanted in "tarh elfa3alla tune")
    4-Almost everyone says all commentaries of festive occasions in that chi-o-oinee tune

    @anba_antonios..."The exposition of the doers is just a generalized text..."
    I don't think we can go as far as making that conclusion. That tune is specific to Kiahk Sunday Eve tasbeha, and the recordings are passed down with that in mind. Now about chi-o-oinee, a source says to say the chio-o-oinee commentary in tarh elfa3alla tune, and another sources says to say Bright Saturday tarh in chi-o-oinee tune. I don't think this is enough evidence to to say it "can be said on all sundays"...specially when you have la7n o-oon o helpees set to be said for every difnar introduction.
    What is the source that said chi-o-oinee should be in tarh elfa3alla tune was incorrect?!--and this is a big possibility since all the tarh and difnar tunes were mainly lost considering that they're were local texts rather than something that the entire church used. What is chi-o-oinee was marked incorrectly as a watos rather than adam?!
  • dg920
    edited November 2016
    If I may give a more conclusive response, 

    The tunes handed down for the expositions are as follows: 
    1) Annual has separate Adam and Watos tunes. These tunes are used also in Kiahk and Great Lent. 
    Adam order:
    a. Amoini Marenouosht
    b. Anon Kha Nilaos
    c. Ouon Ouhelpis `ntan
    d. Ouon Oumetsemnos
    e. Shere ne Maria tichrompi
    f. Shere ne Maria Khen oushere

    Most people say just verses 1 and 5. Ouon ouhelpis should be said after anon kha. Thats when you can also chant it in its original long tune. If you notice, it also follows the order of the verses of cymbals Adam. 

    Watos Order: 
    a. Tenouosht `mfiot `nagathos
    b. Shere ne o tiparthenos
    c. Ouon Ouhelpis 
    d. Ouon Oumetsemnos

    Typically however, 3 and 4 usually aren’t said with the Watos for some reason. Most likely because the tune itself is long already and it is slightly different. Much more research has to be done regarding the expositions. As the Cantors say, The Long Watos was reserved for Kiahk and Great Lent Vespers on Saturday because of how long it was. This does not mean it cannot be chanted annually.  During Midnight Praises of Watos Days we should say the short tune of the watos or if time permits the medium tune. 


    2) Joyful Tune (Exposition of the Workers tune) - same tune for both Adam and Watos expositions during joyful seasons, and in funerals that take place on Sundays or the Holy Fifities, and for the Exposition of the Workers said now during kiahk midnight praises. The exposition of the workers used to be said during all Sunday Midnight Praises as written by Ibn Kabar. This is back when they considered Sunday as joyful days, which is why technically we are not supposed to say owoh nai nem etc. 

    3) Palm Sunday/Feast of the Cross - same tune for both Adam and Watos. 

    4) Holy Week - not split into Adam and Watos but rather Morning and Evening. 



    Lastly, Tenouosht is NOT the same tune as the great Teoi. 



  • RemnkemiRemnkemi
    Danny, you've confused me even more.

    I follow everything you are saying about Annual Adam. A sample is found on Wagdi Bishara's Midnight Psalmody track 37. (I don't know how link files in the media section). I don't see it recorded by Ibrahim Ayad or HICS. More to follow below.

    Question 1
    Under Watos, when you say "Typically however, 3 and 4 usually aren’t said with the Watos for some reason. Most likely because the tune itself is long already and it is slightly different.", are you talking about the Annual Watos tune? As far as I know the annual watos difnar is a short tune (see HCOC Annual Vespers Disc 2, Track 7), no?  Are you talking about another tune for the annual watos difnar?

    Now Wagdi Bishara's Annual watos difnar is exactly like the short festal difnar which is the same as the short tarh elfa3alla (Exposition of the Doers). So according to Wagdi Bishara, the annual watos is the same as festal tune for other cantors.

    Question 2
    By long watos tune, are you talking about the Kiahk Tenoowsht tune (HICS disc 1 track 15 of Kiahk set)? 

    Here's where things get really confusing. In this tune, the first line of Tenoowsht is very long. The remaining 3 lines uses a specific shorter tune. In Ibrahim Ayad's Great Lent Watos exposition (track 7), he starts the first line of Tenoowsht in the same tune as the annual watos tune (HCOC Annual vespers version mentioned above), but then continues with the shorter Kiahk tune of the last 3 lines found in the Vespers exposition (not the long first line and not tahr elfa3alla). So the Great Lent Watos Exposition, according to Ibrahim Ayad, is a hybrid of annual and Kiahk Vespers.

    Question 3
    Is tarh elfa3alla an adam or watos tune? In Kiahk, it is Adam, but the same tune is used for chiooini and it is titled a watos tune. And Fr Metthias Nasr in HICS Theophany records the Adam exposition in the annual Adam tune above (not the short festive or tarh elfa3alla) and the Watos Theophany difnar with the short festal tune/short tarh elfa3alla tune. 

    So we can now see that some cantors use the annual Adam tune for festive Adam difnar, some use the short festive watos tune for the annual watos difnar, some use a mix of annual watos and kaihk Vespers watos as the Great Lentl watos difnar. And everyone seems to use the tarh elf3alla tune for kaiahk adam Midnight psalmody difnar and the same tune for the festive watos difnar. 

    Of course, this is a summary of current practice. If we consider ancient practice from Ibn Kabar and other manuscripts, we get very different conclusions. But let's leave this out of the equation for now.

    I hope we can clarify this. 

    I guess we can safely say the only consistent tune for the difnar from most if not all cantors is The Great Kiahk tune is used for Kiahk Vespers and tarh elfa3alla is used for the Kiahk Midnight Psalmody (Exposition of the Doers). Palm Sunday and Holy Week both use one tune each among all cantors. Annual, festive, and Lent difnar recordings differ among cantors. 

  • ophadeceophadece
    Dear all,
    Who titled shiwoini as watos? To me it is Adam (i.e. the format of the sentence, and the number of syllables)?
    Oujai khan ebshois
  • minatasgeelminatasgeel
    @ophadece...Psalies & Commentaries book, Anba Mettaous. Also Abouna Atalla Arsanius El-Mahraqi book of "Procession of the feasts of the cross and hosanna, and commentaries of Lent and the fifties" (1958)
  • ophadeceophadece
    @minatasgeel,
    I think that is a mistake. One simple way is to fit the tune on either a long Adam hymn or watos and see what should fit. This is an Adam exposition..
    Oujai khan ebshois
  • dg920
    Clarifications:

    ANNUAL ADAM AND WADOS TUNES

    Let's not discuss seasons. That's why we are confused here. Kiahk and Great Lent and Annual expositions, both Adam and Wados, are the same. The respective tunes do not change for any of those seasons so let's just discuss the tunes themselves. 

    The Adam tune has two renditions. 1) That of Muallem Faheem, Muallem Ibrahim and most of the prominent cantors. 2) That of Muallem Tawfik which was spread because of the HICS and Abouna Mettias. 

    The Wados tune has 1 rendition BUT three different lengths. By that I mean it is the same "way" or the same "origin" but there are different melismas. There is a shortened one, a melismatic one (medium), and the longer melismatic (long). The longer melismatic was reserved for vespers praises of Kiahk and Great Lent because of its length; nothing else. The one muallem Ibrahim recorded in Great lent Vespers is the medium one and it is also used at any time there is a wados exposition, whether it be vespers or midnight praises. If there is no time for either you can just say the short one. 
    Regarding what I said about verses 3 and 4 of the wados. Like i said, I don't know why it isnt changed after tenouosht and shere ne, but typically nowadays it isn't. Ouon ouhelpis is long and it isn't said often if at all. But it can be chanted after either the Adam or Wados. AS A MATTER OF FACT, the long Wados tune has pieces of ouon ouhelpis or vice versa, and they are quite unique. I do not recall them being in any other hymns. 


  • dg920
    HICS recording the festal difnar as annual is incorrect, and unless Wagdi has a reason for the recording he has on this site, recording the wados annual tune as the joyful is also wrong. As a matter of fact his rendition of it is slightly different to begin with
  • RemnkemiRemnkemi
    Danny you crack me up.
    "Let's not discuss seasons. That's why we are confused here." Then in the very next sentence you start with "Kiahk and Great Lent and Annual" which are all seasons. I got what you were saying. It's just funny and it shows how insufficient our current terminology is.

    Regardless, can you explain with recordings and/or links? The Annual Adam tune I referenced from Wagdi Bishara and HCOC's sets, I assume, is the rendition you call "That of Muallem Faheem, Muallem Ibrahim and most prominent cantors" (although I could not find recordings from Mlm Faheem, Ibrahim Ayad to verify that). I don't exactly know what you mean by the second rendition, "That of Muallem Tawfik", because I can't find a recording of it. (I didn't see it in HICS set or the Tawfik recordings here and elsewhere).

    I now see what you are saying about the Watos tune having three different lengths (which is attested to in Ibn Kabar). However, where does Tarh elfa3alla fit in here? Ignoring if Tahr elfa3alla is Adam or Watos, is tahr elfa3alla a fourth (and fifth?) way since it also has a short and medium melismatic tune(s)?

    Next question, why did Muallem Ibrahim's Great Lent tune use the very short tune in the first line and the medium tune in the remaining three lines? Does this mean, one can mix and match tunes within a verse?

    Finally, is tahr elfa3alla identical to the festal tune (which in reality is a misnomer since it can be said at any season)? You didn't address this.
  • minatasgeelminatasgeel
    To clarify that tar7 elfa3alla is an adam commentary not a watos and it's recording and most believe it's authentic. The confusion comes in the teaching that says Chi-o-oinee is said in tarh elfa3la tune--this teaching is found in some books so i don't blame cantors for constructing the Resurrection Commentary in that tune, not do i blame them for then saying it is the "festive tune" since the Resurrection feast is a festive occasion. 
  • dg920
    To answer the last question: Tarh el fa3ala is the joyful tune for the exposition. The reason for this is that even Ibn Kabar mentions it in the midnight praise for All Sundays on the basis that sundays in the old tradition were joyful. That's why several expositions were chanted in that tune including the resurrection feast and others. That is my conclusion and its backed by the recordings of the cantors we have. Tawfik recorded both Wados and Adam in that tune, so did Faheem. 

    I'll post links with all the tunes. Please refrain from Wagdi's recordings on here for this specific hymn as they are completely outliers. 

    Regarding mix and match. It's one hymn. It's like saying all 5 verses of samoudi long or saying the first two. If you have time you can say the longer parts. If you don't you say the short one. 
  • ophadeceophadece
    Dear @minatasgeel,
    And therefore it follows that shiwaini is an Adam tune and the sources are mistaken. See what I mean?
    Oujai khan ebshois
Sign In or Register to comment.