y do people always ask if a hymn is reliable or valid??? wat does that mean and y do we say that one muallim is more correct over another one??
Do people try to change the hymns? and if they do y? how would that benefit them in any way?
i ve heard numerous discussions over whether a hymn is valid or not... wats the difference even if it is a little bit off.
forgive me for my ignorance
Enough
Comments
y do people always ask if a hymn is reliable or valid??? wat does that mean and y do we say that one muallim is more correct over another one??
Do people try to change the hymns? and if they do y? how would that benefit them in any way?
i ve heard numerous discussions over whether a hymn is valid or not... wats the difference even if it is a little bit off.
forgive me for my ignorance
Enough
well it depends ont he little bit your talking about. i personally a little bit doent make a hymn invalid but somtimes that confirms it.
the idea is that many people can just randomly make a hymn and say its an old hymn. if he doesn't have a srouce of a trusted muallem/preist/deacon, than it is not valid and it should not be chanted in our churchs. its that simple.
GB
Tony
GB
Tony
Some people try to add personal touch in their learning cd's which i am against. Sometimes a cantor forgets the hymn and makes up a way to arrive to the end. There are many reasons, but the best thing is to have an ultimate source which we can all relay on for the benefit of chanting together in unison.
GB
Tony
I agree with you guys, but tony, the ultimate source has been made to be the Great Mlm Mikhael el Batanouny because he was the first to record all the hymns of the church(at least most of them) and his students.
Enough, Like others have said, they have a sense of pride and don't want to be seen messing up or what not. I've heard that the great mlm Mikhael did that for the kyrie eleison for lent and added more to it than others do because of time. So ibrahim ayad adopted it and i believe he uses that version. A hymn is valid if it has a reliable source and is backed up by more than one reliable source. For example: Oniatk o enthok dimas the hymn that was discussed earlier on the forum, a priest sang the song in the tune of piepnevma in its entirety while i believe it should have been done the way the HCOC did it.
i never said we didnt have a source, but as far as im concerned, no one asked who it was. So i am not arguing that it is muallem mikhail. The issue with kerie leyson is that muallem mikhail purposefully added a part from taishory pascha because it took a long time for the pope to finish his circuit. Even though this is true, it is still good to follow our source.
GB
Tony