Ⲟⲩⲛⲟϥ ⲙ̀ⲙⲟ ⲙⲁⲣⲓⲁ (Rejoice, O Mary!)

̀While most Coptic faithful know ⲟⲩⲛⲟϥ ⲙ̀ⲙⲟ ⲙⲁⲣⲓⲁ (افرحي يا مريم) as a hymn chanted on Sunday when we find ourselves running early, very few are aware of its origin and purpose, and even fewer read the text properly. Here’s another tidbit from the Coptic-English Psalmody Project!

In Bohairic practice, ⲟⲩⲛⲟϥ ⲙⲙⲟ ⲙⲁⲣⲓⲁ is a portion of the ⲗⲱⲃϣ (finale/crown) of ϯⲑⲉⲟⲧⲟⲕⲓⲁ ⲙⲡⲓϣⲟⲙⲧ (Tuesday Tadakia).

Coptic Text:

Ⲟⲩⲛⲟϥ ⲙ̀ⲙⲟ ⲙⲁⲣⲓⲁ ⳾ ϯⲃⲱⲕⲓ ⲟⲩⲟϩ ϯⲙⲁⲩ ⳾ ϫⲉ ⲫⲏⲉⲧϧⲉⲛ ⲡⲉⲁⲙⲏⲣ ⳾ ⲛⲓⲁⲅⲅⲉⲗⲟⲥ ⲥⲉϩⲱⲥ ⲉⲣⲟϥ ⳾

Ⲟⲩⲟϩ ⲛⲓⲭⲉⲣⲟⲩⲃⲓⲙ ⳾ ⲥⲉⲟⲩⲱϣⲧ ⲙ̀ⲙⲟϥ ⲁⲝⲓⲱⲥ ⳾ ⲛⲉⲙ ⲛⲓⲥⲉⲣⲁⲫⲓⲙ ⳾ ϧⲉⲛ ⲟⲩⲙⲉⲧⲁⲧⲙⲟⲩⲛⲕ ⳾

Ⲉⲩⲉⲣⲣⲓⲡⲓⲍⲓⲛ ϧⲉⲛ ⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉⲛϩ ⳾ ϫⲉ ⲫⲁⲓ ⲡⲉ ⲡⲟⲩⲣⲟ ⲛ̀ⲧⲉ ⲡⲱⲟⲩ ⳾ ⲫⲏⲉⲧⲱⲗⲓ ⲙ̀ⲫⲛⲟⲃⲓ ⲙ̀ⲡⲓⲕⲟⲥⲙⲟⲥ ⳾ ⲕⲁⲧⲁ ⲡⲉϥⲛⲓϣϯ ⲛ̀ⲛⲁⲓ ⳾

(Interestingly, two 14th c. ms include ⲉⲩⲉⲣⲕⲩⲣⲓⲍⲓⲛ coming from the Greek κηρυσσω meaning to proclaim or preach; one of which translates into Arabic as “calling/proclaiming with their wings”)

English Text (Draft Translation-without musical consideration):

Rejoice, Mary, handmaiden and mother, for the one in your bosom—Him, the angels praise, the cherubim justly worship, and the seraphim unceasingly fan with their wings, saying, “This is the King of Glory who lifts/takes away the sin of the world according to/because of his great mercy!”

English Text (Draft Translation-with musical consideration):

Rejoice, O Mary, • handmaiden and mother, • for the one in your bosom — • Him, the angels praise, •

the cherubim • properly/worthily worship, • and the seraphim • unceasingly •

fan their wings, saying, • “This is the King of Glory • who lifts the sin of the world • because of his great mercy.” •

In this placement within the ⲗⲱⲃϣ of Tuesday, these three stanzas form one complete thought and are translated as such in Arabic.

Unfortunately, the use of ⲟⲩⲛⲟϥ ⲙⲙⲟ ⲙⲁⲣⲓⲁ as an ⲁⲥⲡⲁⲥⲙⲟⲥ has distorted the original context. Let’s see how!

In contemporary practice the ⲁⲥⲡⲁⲥⲙⲟⲥ, ⲟⲩⲛⲟϥ ⲙ̀ⲙⲟ ⲙⲁⲣⲓⲁ, is seen as a standard text that is chanted throughout the year (though this was not the case until recently) consisting of 5-7 stanzas:

1. ⲟⲩⲛⲟϥ ⲙ̀ⲙⲟ

2. ⲟⲩⲟϩ ⲛⲓⲭⲉⲣⲟⲩⲃⲓⲙ

3. ⲙ̀ⲙⲟⲛ ⲛⲧⲁⲛ ⲛⲟⲩⲡⲁⲣⲣⲏⲥⲓⲁ

4. ϩⲓⲛⲁ ⲛⲧⲉⲛϩⲱⲥ

5. ϫⲉ ⲭⲟⲩⲁⲃ

6. ⲧⲉⲛϯϩⲟ

7. ⲛⲉⲙ ⲡⲉϥⲕⲉϣⲫⲏⲣ

Notes:

1) Stanzas 1-2 are from the Tuesday ⲗⲱⲃϣ as we’ve previously mentioned.The Coptic Tone system allows for the importation of one liturgical text to be used in multiple places. An ⲁⲇⲁⲙ text from a ⲯⲁⲗⲓ or ⲑⲉⲟⲧⲟⲕⲓⲁ, for example, can be used as an ⲁⲥⲡⲁⲙⲟⲥ (e.g. ϫⲉ ϧⲉⲛ ⲡⲉⲕⲟⲩⲱⲓⲛⲓ from Monday Tadakia used as ⲁⲥⲡⲁⲥⲙⲟⲥ for Holy Saturday, ⲗⲱⲓϫⲓ ⲛⲓⲃⲉⲛ from Monday Psali used as ⲁⲥⲡⲁⲥⲙⲟⲥ for Coptic New Year etc.) A ⲃⲁⲧⲟⲥ text can be taken from a psali or doxology and used during communion(e.g ⲡⲓⲙⲁⲓⲣⲱⲙⲓ for Great Lent or ϯⲡⲁⲣⲑⲉⲛⲟⲥ for Advent). When these interpolations are indicated in most Coptic manuscripts, they do not write the text in full, but usually indicate just the title of a stanza or two to inform of us which section as a whole may be used. They inform us of a notion or method, not necessarily a specific and limited set of verses to be used. Hence, the variation from manuscript to manuscript (see photos)

2) Stanza 3 is an additional verse that I have not seen anywhere else in the Coptic corpus other than this ⲁⲥⲡⲁⲥⲙⲟⲥ. It is not present in the manuscripts that mention this ⲁⲥⲡⲁⲥⲙⲟⲥ but is written in the Euchologion of 1902 and as such has become a part of this text. Stanza 3 is clearly, both textually and musically, a recent addition. When chanting this stanza (in Coptic or even in Arabic), we realize that it does not follow the typical music of the ⲁⲥⲡⲁⲥⲙⲟⲥ but contains an extra musical phrase and a bunch more sharp transitions between words. This is because the text itself does not fit the ⲁⲇⲁⲙ tone structure and thus the music does not fit properly. In a moment, we will see how/why the text doesn’t fit either.

3) Stanzas 4-5 which are part of the oldest ⲁⲥⲡⲁⲥⲙⲟⲥ known to us (ⲡⲭⲥ ⲡⲉⲛⲥⲱⲧⲏⲣ — see photos) have become a “standard conclusion” of some sort, though it makes no sense in most contexts. This is how the now “standard conclusion” reads in its original placement (Only within the context of its original use does this “standard conclusion” make sense)

ⲡ︦ⲭ︦ⲥ︦ ⲡⲉⲛⲥⲱⲧⲏⲣ ⳾ ⲉⲕⲉⲁⲓⲧⲉⲛ ⲛⲉⲙⲡϣⲁ ⳾ ⲙ̀ⲡⲉⲕⲁⲥⲡⲁⲥⲙⲟⲥ ⲉⲑⲟⲩⲁⲃ ⳾ ⲛϩⲣⲏⲓ ϧⲉⲛ ⲛⲓⲫⲏⲟⲩⲓ ⳾

ϩⲓⲛⲁ ⲛⲧⲉⲛϩⲱⲥ ⲉⲣⲟⲕ ⳾ ⲛⲉⲙ ⲛⲓⲭⲉⲣⲟⲩⲃⲓⲙ ⳾ ⲛⲉⲙ ⲛⲓⲥⲉⲣⲁⲫⲓⲙ ⳾ ⲉⲛⲱϣ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ⲉⲛϫⲱ ⲙⲙⲟⲥ ⳾

ϫⲉ ⲭⲟⲩⲁⲃ ⲭⲟⲩⲁⲃ ⲭⲟⲩⲁⲃ ⳾ ⲡ⳪ ⲡⲓⲡⲁⲛⲧⲱⲕⲣⲁⲧⲟⲣ ⳾ ⲧⲫⲉ ⲛⲉⲙ ⲡⲕⲁϩⲓ ⲙⲉϩ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ⳾ ϧⲉⲛ ⲡⲉⲕⲱⲟⲩ ⲛⲉⲙ ⲡⲉⲕⲧⲁⲓⲟ ⳾

“O Christ, our savior, [you shall] make us worthy of your holy greeting from the heavens that we may praise you with the cherubim and the seraphim, crying out saying, ‘Holy, holy, holy, Lord, Pantocrator, heaven and earth are full of your glory and honor’.”

4) Stanzas 6-7 are optional in the presence of a bishop. These also are clearly additions that are not ⲁⲇⲁⲙ in structure but have been inserted into a few hymns such as ⲡⲓⲭⲉⲣⲉⲧⲓⲥⲙⲟⲥ (Verses of Cymbals) and the ⲁⲥⲡⲁⲥⲙⲟⲥ (Kiss of Peace). CR places these two before the “standard conclusion” as does the Euchologion of 1902, though these stanzas do not belong and are not mentioned in the Ordo of the Church manuscripts.

With this information, let’s read through the current translation of this hymn (CR) and see how mixed up the English text that we have been chanting our whole lives is.

1. Rejoice, O Mary, handmaiden and mother, for the angels praise Him who is in your arms,

2. And the cherubim worthily worship him; the seraphim too, without ceasing.

3. We have no boldness before our Lord Jesus Christ apart from your prayers and intercessions, O our Lady, the Lady of us all, the Theotokos.

4. We ask you, O Son of God, keep the life of our patriarch, Pope Abba (…) the arch priest. Confirm him upon his throne.

5. And his partner in the liturgy, our holy righteous father, Abba (…) the bishop. Confirm him upon his throne.

6. That we may praise you with the cherubim and the seraphim, proclaiming and saying:

7. Holy, holy, holy, O Lord, the Pantocrator, heaven and earth are full of your glory and honor.

Reading through this as a plain text, several questions arise:

1) “What are the seraphim doing too?” Because the third stanza from the ⲗⲱⲃϣ is not being connected, CR has changed the translation to try to make sense of it. The angels praise, the cherubim worship, and the seraphim too without ceasing…do what? The second stanza is turned into a full sentence and the original conclusion of the thought has been disregarded. Though CR did not decide to only take two stanzas (that predates this app), the translation being changed in order to make sense hinders anyone who reads it from asking the necessary questions to fix the issue. Instead of leaving it as it was, the entire meaning of the phrase was changed.

2) We then jump ship, totally shifting subjects, and say “We have no boldness…”. After speaking directly to the Virgin, describing the worship given to her son, we switch to a completely different thought without completing the first one.

3) If we follow the Coptic order as is handed down by the cantors, we would then say ϩⲓⲛⲁ ⲛⲧⲉⲛϩⲱⲥ (in order that we praise you). But, in that case, what happened in order for us to praise him? What did we receive or ask for or speak of in order to praise him? If we choose to follow the order of the 1902 Euchologion and ask for our patriarch and bishops in order that we may praise Him, does that not make our praise conditional based on the response to our petitions? Of course, I am not insinuating such, but based solely on the reading of this text, can one not understand it to be so?

4) Without understanding, a simple beautiful text of three stanzas which would take no longer than 3 or 4 minutes to chant as an ⲁⲥⲡⲁⲥⲙⲟⲥ, is now a 10 minute long endeavor. Now, the ⲁⲥⲡⲁⲥⲙⲟⲥ is rarely chanted at all because of all the additions, and when it is chanted, the majority of our people sing it without understanding a word, or even questioning the logical consistency of the text. ⲟⲩⲛⲟϥ ⲙⲙⲟ is chanted year round without any consideration for the original standard texts or even the rest of the seasonal chants. And because we are content with this, our English translations reflect the same lack of understanding and, honestly, haphazardness.

The most important factor in the work of the Coptic English Psalmody is to re-read our texts critically through a theologically trained and liturgically engrained lens. Only in doing so can we further our liturgical life and practice, and prepare our children to take on a world so insistent on tackling the Christian tradition. We have to understand and participate fully in what we do as the Church!

If you found this explanation interesting and beneficial please pray for this project and if you’re able to, visit SupportMyService https://supportmyservice.org/coptic-english-psalmody/ and help us reach our goal! We’re almost there!

Attached Resources:

Image 1: Vat.Copt.38 (1378 AD) – ⲟⲩⲛⲟϥ ⲙ̀ⲙⲟ in Tuesday ⲗⲱⲃϣ