Piyut in the Ashkenazi tradition
Judit Frigyesi
When one attempts to give an overview of the musical concepts of the Ashkenazi tradition, one has to keep in mind that it spanned over several centuries and on a vast geographical area with multiple complex social structures thus general ideas could be only approximate and tentative. Furthermore, our knowledge is based on relatively late documents, with the written sources (cantorial manuscripts and printed handbooks) dating back in large numbers only to the late 18th century, and sound recording to the end of the 19th, and in large number only the beginning of the 20th. The concepts described in the followings are based on these two types of sources and especially on the oral practice of East-European Jewish liturgy as I encountered it during my research in the second half of the 20th century.
To this tradition, unlike in most Jewish traditions outside of Europe, piyut is not a melody-defining concept. This means that piyut texts which occur during the liturgy or para- liturgical situations are not distinguished from the other texts in their musical rendition. In the Ashkenazi liturgy, in general, textual genres (like psalm, Torah section, Talmud section, piyut, prayer) are not associated with musical genres. Apart from the public cantillation of the Torah (leinen), the melody, rhythm and the style of the performance depends on the liturgical place and function of the given text and the customs and traditions associated with that liturgical function, and only in a few special cases on the form of the text.
One could say that in the East-European Jewish tradition a conceptual development took place in the course of which virtually every text used in the liturgy became to be thought of as being within the realm of prayer. The music reflects that attitude. To that conception, the piyut is primarily prayer. A typical example: most of the piyutim in the High holiday services are performed in the same manner than the rest of the prayers that are not piyutim. Someone who does not know their origin, would not notice that they have poetic forms, and in fact, less educated people of even very religious communities did not know that some of these texts were piyutim -- for them, piyut was simply another prayer. It is difficult to say when, how and why this process took place but its end result is significant. It means that, although every text might not have the same importance, in essence each line and each word of the liturgy partakes in the same sacred essence.
The basic musical style used for prayer – and thus also for most of the piyutim – is a kind of speech-music or recitation with flowing rhythm and with an almost spontaneously developing sequence of melodic and rhythmic gestures. There are countless styles within this broad concept of recitative ranging from the simple and fast recitation, called davenen , through
various more melodious styles, to the exuberant and highly ornamental style of hazzanim. There is a musical system that governs which of these styles, what kind of melody and what possibilities of variation should be used for each particular part of the text in the liturgy – this system is called nusah. This flowing rhythm style is the basis of liturgy and it expresses (or better: it is) the sense of eternity – of the sacred.
Against this recitative style, there stands the song. I use here the word “song” as a musical concept: symmetrical overall form, normally with lines and strophes of corresponding length and structure – a form that impresses as a self-contained and closed unit. Many songs are performed rubato, but even in that case, there is a sense of a metric structure with perceptible beat, or at least with a strong feel of pulsation.
Although the basis of the liturgy, and of the musical thinking of the East-European Jews is the flowing rhythm melodies (davenen, nusah, hazzanuth), the songs have utmost importance. Within the liturgy, the songs accentuate a moment that expresses the communal togetherness and sometimes even worldliness against the austere and mystical intensity of davenen and nusah. At the same time, a song could be the highpoint of the expression of mystical thought. The expressive potential of songs covers a much broader range than that of the recitative -- practically any thought and emotion. The songs have an enormous variety both in their style, function, and meaning, and also in terms of their text.
In the East European villages and often also in towns, it was accepted to recite the entirety of the services in the flowing styles of davenen/nusah, without any communal song at all. As far as I could establish, this was not the practice for holidays, and even for Shabbat, it was customary to insert a few songs. The most natural solution for the insertion of a song was a piyut text, but this was by no means obligatory. In many communities Lecho daudi, the famous poem for the eve of Shabbat was simply recited. There were communities where, on Shabbat shaharit, the piyut “El odaun” was recited according to the nusah, undistinguishable from the rest of the prayers, and a section of the Kedusha (that is not piyut) was sung to a song. Some piyutim were traditionally sung to a song and some even had fixed melody which might or might not reflected the poetic form of the piyut. The most obvious example of a fixed melody that matches the poetic structure of the piyut is Akdomus for Shavuot. Nevertheless, such clear correlations are rare. Most piyutim are rarely and some are virtually never performed as songs. At the same time, songs occur for texts which are not piyutim or not even poetic. For instance, in many communities, it is accepted to recite parts of the une sane tokef prayer to song.
How many and what kind of songs were used within the liturgy depended on the tradition of the region and community. It seems to me that in general, the use of the songs were more limited in Easter Europe, and were more in favor in the German territories, and became particularly popular in the modern Conservative practice. In the most religious communities of Eastern Europe, it was not considered to be in good style, except for special occasions, to insert more than two-four songs into the Shabbat shaharit. In the East, most of the Hallel prayer is recited with its nusah, but it is almost obligatory to sing songs for certain verses in the second
part of the prayer. In the West, often only the blessing is recited with the traditional nusah, and the rest of the psalms are performed as songs. In the East, benchen after the meal is recited individually and on a low voice, while in some German traditions, as well as in the modern conservative practice, it is sung to a fixed and mostly metric melody. In the East, the first part of the Haggadah for the Seder that occurs before the meal never had songs, not even for “dayenu”, while in many of the German traditions, and in the modern conservative practice, many parts of text are sung.
As opposed to the liturgy, songs had predominance in para-liturgical contexts. Around the Shabbat table, for the poetic sections section of the Seder after the meal, and at the table of the Rabbi (tish), the songs greatly outnumbered the recitative which occurred only for a few specific texts, typically for blessings. The most important types of East Ashkenazi songs are: (1) zemirot for Shabbat, (2) songs for the Rabbi’s table (tish), which mostly fall in the category of what is called nigun, especially Hassidic nigun, (3) and Yiddish songs (which however has no connection with piyut).
As for their music, apart from the Yiddish songs, there is no sharp dividing line between these categories. The same type of melody, rhythm and performance can be used in any of these contexts. There is virtually no melody that wouldn’t be possible, in principle, to match with any text. In fact, the same songs, in their entity or in fragments, were used for a variety of texts and in a variety of functions -- for one text in one community and for another in another one. This does not mean that there were not traditional patterns. Certain texts were more likely to be sung for songs and, in some cases, the style of the melody and performance and were also fixed, although rarely the exact melody. There are certain melody types, and typical melodic lines that recur, and similarly, there are typical performing manners.
The facts that (1) songs styles are shared among all liturgical and para-liturgical functions and (2) any text, or fragment of text (and not only complete poems) could be the basis for a song, and finally that (3) melodies and performing styles, and even specific melodies, can be matched, in principle, with any text and vice versa, any text could be matched, in principle, with any melody – these three circumstances create a situation where an amazingly rich and varied song repertory had been created.
In fact, many of the songs are actually complex compositions of rabbis, hazzanim, and composers. The songs range from two-line miniatures, through simple strophic songs, to lengthy compositions of several contrasting sections. The possibilities of the melodic and rhythmic structure are virtually endless. A song can incorporate sections of prayer-like flowing rhythm, fluctuations between rubato and rigid metric style, elements of cantorial music, local folk music, marches, dances, and even popular music. But although the totality of the song repertory seems to be heterogeneous, there is a conceptual idea behind every song. In one way or another, each song attempts to reach to the spirit of what prayer expresses – through a different path.