How tall was Nimai really? -

Indians are mystified by tall people, because they themselves are on average relatively short. The Gaudiya biographies and theological texts glorify Sri Gauranga and Nityananda as especially tall persons. Now the question arises, how tall could they really have been? I remember people having said that they might have been above two meters (6' 6'') tall, hinting at a height of 2,10 to 2,20 (7' to 7'4''). These people generally do not think about what that would really mean. It would mean for instance that their physical size would not fit the average type of building structures present at their time. In concrete terms: They would hit their heads each time they enter a private house or move about in a given structure, except if all the buildings had high ceilings. But at the doors they would have had extreme problems all the time. The absent-mindedness caused by prem would have put them at risk a lot.

Another problem would have been their physical contact with friends and fellow-men of theirs. First there is the awkwardness of an intimate exchange "from way up there" to "way below". Second, what's called beauty turns into ugliness, monstrousness. And how about hugging? The texts often speak of how Sri Gauranga clasped someone (e.g. Sanatana at Puri) to his chest. If Sri Gauranga was that tall, his hug would have pulled Sanatana's head at best to his belly. If a bhakta and Gauranga were chest to chest, they would have to be of similar sizes, or just moderately different ones. Otherwise it just would not work.

Here is an illustration to make my point. This is one of the tallest men on earth. He is around 2,40 meters, or 8'(?). The contrast is so stark, no chance for beauty and happiness.

There are some enormous footprints being worshiped at some Mandirs claimed to be Sri Gauranga's, as far as I know, one pair of them also at a Radha Kund place. Just from memory I dare say that the shoe-size for those enormous feet exceeds everything present in the shoe-market of today. Who made those footprints, and on what assumption? If those foot-prints belonged to whom they are claimed to have belonged (in other words: if they are not fabricated), that person would have been far above 2 meters, probably in the region of the above mentioned maxima.

If Nimai was that tall, he would have been a huge baby at the time of his birth. His mother would have had some kind of problem, even though he was her seventh or eighth baby. It is credible that Nimai Misra was taller than the average Bengali. There is one good reason that adds to that credibility. Taller children generally look older than they are and therefore are treated differently, as more mature persons. But also more is expected from them. Being tall in a family of short people makes one extraordinary, and raises extraordinary hopes and expectations.

Well, I don't have any scriptural reference, but just from experience I know you don't have to be that tall over the norm to be considered a 'giant'. I stand 6'3", which while tall is not towering above the population, yet I am often refered to as 'gigantic' by friends. These friends are usually 5'9" and under. So, a difference of 6" or so can make a big (no pun intended) difference in perception. Let's assume an average Indian population hight of 5'4" (I have no basis for this, just guessing/giving an example), if They were 5'10" or taller, they would be seen to be much taller than most others, yet they would be in the accepted norm of height.

That is probably the correct size. In Ambika Kalna (Nadia) there are the "walk-in" deities of Sri Nitai and Gaur (walk-in according to the story about Gauridas Pandit who chose the original persons versus their wooden replicas) and those deities are tall, difficult to say how tall because one does not get to see them for more than a few seconds at a time and is not allowed to take photographs. I guess they are around or perhaps a little above 6 feet tall.

Imagine the awkwardness of the exchange with his wives, (if they were a lot taller), who most likely were petite to our average standards. Gauridas Pandits brother's two daughters were wedded by Nitai. Obviously Nitai-Gaur were also a lot taller than Gauridas (at least the size of his deities), and it is unlikely his nieces were not similar to his size.

The question remains regarding those enormous footprints. And isn't there a pair of wooden sandals shown at Nabadwip Srivas Angan? I do not have photos of either of these objects.

Perhaps Madhava could make a photo of the footprints present at Radha Kund...?

Hmm... Mahaprabhu's footprints, where are they again?

I am 182 cm (6 feet) and not particularly sturdy, and in Finland I feel pretty slim even amidst people who may be a couple of centimeters shorter. However, here people keep reminding me of how big I am, and true enough I often (at times of bodily absorption) feel much bigger than the average person walking on the street.

would you please change the topic name which will address Mahaprabhu as mahaprabhu.... as addressing mahaprabhu by Nimai Misra is somewhat not sweet in ears, as this is the forum about all his devotees.

Please do not take offence.....Just an sincere desire.

Also generally in bengal also people belongs to Higher Cast are much taller than the average ... also this has exception but that proves the rule.

Even in common brahmin family it is not that surprising to have height ranging above 6 feet and more.


Jay Nitai
Dasanudas

Most of the biographers have the description about mahaprabhu's height as 4 hands ( his own) long...


That may give some clue

Now that you mention it -- not that I'd have anything against your proposal -- I'd be curious as to why so, specifically. We have no problem in addressing him as Nimai, that is indeed very common. We call him the son of Jagannath Mishra, that is also very common. Yet Nimai Mishra is not good? Adding the Mishra makes our conception mixed? ()Referring to him with a surname and a family name does not mean we are thinking of him as an ordinary man, I don't think so anyway. (Actually, it would be "Vishvambhar Mishra" if we wanted to use a "legal" name.)

I understand your concern and your feelings, but in my view this is exactly not about Mahaprabhu which is a title given by the later tradition, but about the concrete reality of the person born there at Nabadwip. All this embellishment is wonderful in its own place, but here I am referring to physical facts. If it sounds more acceptable to you, I can leave out the Misra and just talk about Nimai which name is certainly acceptable to most devotees also in devotional terms.

four hands, sounds like one of those funny Indian measurements
How much is one hand? Put in your way it sounds like Nimai (read: Mahaprabhu) was really a Miniprabhu. Unless he had hands like King-Kong...

Hands? I believe you mean arms. However, being four of his own long arms long? My one arm is 70 cm long. That is, 2.5x my arm is my entire height. I believe that is a rather normal bodily proportion. Someone's entire height being four times his arm would mean his arms would be fairly miniscule. That would mean that for example my arms would be only 45 cm long, which would look fairly awkward.

After all, is it not that those long and beautiful arms of Gaura are told to stretch close to his knees, a traditional sign of a mahapurusha? It just doesn't quite add up, the four times arm's length idea.

Ok.. thats funny.

Hmm.. hands sounds almost like cubits, which is tip of middle finger to elbow. Which, given normal bodily proportion, everyone is ~ 4 'hands'/cubits tall. You are about as tall as your arms outstreached, tip to tip. Of course, Mahaprabhu had really long arms...

Sorry this is my fault, it should be arm.... I was in hurry to post , hard to find time from work place , that is why is the error....

Well, I couldn't resist..I took out the tape measurer and my finger tip to elbow is 17'' and I am 68" inches tall... or 5'8"...so if this is a relative measurement...I don't get why it is used? It isn't very specific.

Right, and 17" * 4 = your height. Works out exactly for you. There are two questions here:

1, When Nimai is refered to as '4 arms' high, what exactly is an arm defined as? If its the entire arm, then its a weird proportion, to be as tall as 4 of your arms is to have really small arms! Hence my proposal that 'arm' = 'forearm'. Or perhaps an 'arm' is a fixed length?

2. Why is '4 arms' significant? I might contend that since 4 forearms is the correct proportion for a human being, it might be to give Nimai 'normal' proportions. Or if an 'arm' is a fixed amount, it would provide an accurate measurment.

I'm guessing the answers are requiring quite a bit more research.

ok....I found that an arm, or a standard "Long" cubit was 21 inches...so Lord Caitanya was, by this standard (tip to elbow+28fingers, finger+.75 of our inch...28 fingers, 21 inches) was 84 inches or 8 foot. That is tall.

This is according to what I read HERE

Right, and as nabadip-ji initially stated, this poses some.. um.. problems. I think until I see the growth marks on Nimai's bedroom wall (you know, where Saci mata measured how much he grew from one birthday to the next), I'll default back to my initial conjecture. He was tall relative to the social norm of the time, but not outside the normal limits of height.

I am curious now if there are paintings or drawings from back then that may depict Lord Caitanya as being exceptionaly tall?

btw, be excuse the redundency of my previous posts.

The family name of Nimai, the crown-jewel of the Mishra-dynasty, has now been removed from the topic heading.

They are at Sri Jiva Goswami's Bhajan Kutir.

You wouldn't possibly mean the feet below Radha-Damodar, as in the picture below?

[attachmentid=1444]

I don't think pictures such as this are meant to be taken as an exact measurement of his feet.

Indeed a sweet meditation! Another question here would be what was the size of Mahaprabhu’s lotus feet? Are His shoes at Vishnupriya Mandir the actual size?

Asking just in case you ever get the chance to send him a new pair of slippers?

A while ago the Pujari from that temple sent me a letter to help him to take Mahaprabhu’s shoes for a world tour. Unfortunately I couldn’t help very much, however, somehow he end up passing through Brazil and blessed it with the holy shoes.

Yes you right it maybe time for a new pair of shoes, but still we have to find out a comfortable size. Hopefully it would not be bigger then Vamanadeva’s lotus feet...

Those feet in the picture are supposed to be in the size according to the imprint in Jagannath Mandir in Puri. Sure they are a bit exaggerated with those toes sticking out in such unnatural way. People meanwhile use this sight as evidence for the tallness of Sri Gauranga. Is there any Indian bhakta who saw the footprints in Jagannath Mandir?

How big are they? Maybe his shoes and imprints are that big because Gauranga was walking for two .

Yes, Lord Caitanya, the embodiment of the divine couple.

It maybe something to consider:

"Hard to know how tall Mahaprabhu was, but it maybe possible to find out His tallness by measuring His Lotus Feet/shoes/sandals…(?)"

A Gift

About Radha: http://www.harekrsna.com/philosophy/radhak...i/lotusfeet.htm

Here a Link about Lord Caitanya:
http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/tattvas2.htm#3

Since the measurements in any of the medieval texts have not been given in either inches and feet or meters and centimeters, this is just guesswork. I would assume there were numerous standards of measure throughout India at that time and one would have to do some serious research into what those were at Nabadwip and at Puri for that era. And even then, one may not get the answers down to the precise miliimeter. Even the inch we use today had many different sizes until the international standard for it was eventually fixed.

As far as unusual height, consider the case of Bin Laden, who stands an inch taller than basketball star Michael Jordan among relatively short Arabs.

For me it is not about inches and centimeters here. The question is whether Nimai was much taller than his friends (as is assumed by many implicitly or explicitly) or whether he was just "a head taller" than everyone else. For me it is also about the myth of the physical reality of Gauranga that is created among Gaudiyas, without really being looked at in concrete terms what that myth implies. For instance, what is at present shown as having been the Gambira in Puri is in reality such a small room, that would appear as a kind of torture cell if Gauranga was as tall as is assumed generally. I know that that room is not the historical one. But presentations are shown to make an impression, they create a myth which then takes on its own life. In such a way facticity is created, and truth fabricated.

It seems, religions are the field of preference for such fabrications. Faith is exploited with such representations (as the footprints and other relics), thus faith is nourished, strengthend, initially probably with good intentions, until facts are substituted for fictions, and a new kind of background reality has taken hold. How tall Nimai really was in milimeters or inches, is not that important anymore; what is important is to be aware of the way we create truths for ourselves, as we give credence to representations "from the past" that are offered to us. What then remains is a feeling of helplessness in the face of an undistinguishable mixture of fact and fiction.

There is also a place somewhere where Mahaprabhu fainted out of ecstasy, feeling such intense bliss that the stone melted according to His bodily contours. Is it possible to gain an estimation of His height from that stone impression? The name of this place escapes me right now ..

Is this maybe the place you are trying to remember?

"(2) Impression of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's body offering full dandavat (prostrated obeisances with all limbs) - at the Alalanatha Mandira, 14 miles from Puri."

http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/tattvas2.htm#3

Yes that's it! The Alalanatha mandir. I even saw a picture of the melted stone but it was taken from an upright angle and was thus not very clear.

I’m glad I could help. The point here is if the real impressions of Mahaprabhu’s body are there as mentioned above, in a full dandavat position, then it is very possible to measure His height. Or would there be any other objection before total acceptance...?

I found this description on a related website:

Alalanatha is also known as Brahmagiri. It is about 25km from Jagannath Puri. There is a temple of Lord Jagannath here, and a large stone slab marked with the impression of Sri Chaitanya’s transcendental body. The stone melted while he lay there in ecstasy. Anyone can view the stone, but non-Hindus are not permitted into the temple.
Sri Chaitanya would often come here during the two weeks when Lord Jagannath remains in seclusion before the Ratha-yatra festival. At the rear of the temple tower is a sculpture of Narasimha with Hiranyakasipu on his lap.There is also a sculpture of Lord Vamana piercing the outer shell of the universe.


Did anyone here visit the Alalanatha temple and could give a vivid description about how large approximately is this melted stone?

Here is the search

Eight months back I visited there when I was in india. I took nice photograph also but sorry that is not a digital camera and I can not scan the image. To my understanding though I am not very sure but I can guess that length of impression of Gaura's SriDeha(transcendental body) would be about 6 feet 3 inches approximately.
Hope this would help.

Dear Dasanudas, thanks; my Dandavats!

Radhe-Radhe!

Considering His long arms, how would we start the calculation to find out His height? Two feet long arms?

=========================================

"For the general audience"

And here is more about Nimai Pandita…

As you can see below, there is a contradiction about Mahaprabhu’s disappearance date.

"Caitanya Mahaprabhu disappeared at the age of 48, and Gadadhara Pandita was only one year younger. He left this world a year after Mahaprabhu disappeared, and thus there was no chance for him to become old. When Mahaprabhu disappeared, following the order of Mahaprabhu, he did not leave the worship of Gopinatha. Always feeling separation, he quickly became lean and thin and could not even stand to give a garland to Gopinatha. Seeing Gadadhara Pandita in such a state, Gopinatha sat down for him, and Gadadhara Pandita continued to offer the garlands along with his tears."
http://www.purebhakti.com/lectures/lecture...indiapuri.shtml


"Key Events in the Life of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu
(1486-1533 AD - 47 years)
• 1533 (age 47) - His disappearance pastime in the temple of Tota Gopinatha"
http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/tattvas2.htm#2


Is that a common fact accepted by historians, in the sense that no one really know the real date of His disappearance or is it just part of the numberless contradictions among GV?

Another point is, although Mahaprabhu was seeing disappearing in three different locations (Jaganatha Murti, Tota Gopinatha and the Ocean) apparently, most GV accepts that His disappearance took place in Tota Gopinatha…

Any special detail in meditating on Mahaprabhu leaving this world through Tota Gopinath. And what really supports GV in that direction?

There is no controversy about the disappearance date of Sriman Mahaprabhu.... That date is very much accepted by Historian and the GVs. Only there is little confusion about the time of disappearance. Dr. Radha Govinadanath has discussed in his Chaitanya Charitranmirta where he has reached conclusion about Mahaprabhu disappearnce lila by scientific analysis of various theroies. But the disappearence date of Mahaprabhu is beyond any controversy.

Among the recent publication, I have one small booklet published by Sri Pathbari Asram Barahanagar, Calcutta titled as "Mahaprabhur Mahaprayan" where author ( I can not remember his name now) discussed several theroies about the Disappearance lila and pointed out the source of confusion regarding this. And he clearly presented convincing arguments for GV's believe about the "Mahaprabhus disappearance in Tota Gopinath".

What about the contradictory ages mentioned above (47 and 48).




If do you have access to this book, could you please show the arguments that he uses to support the merging in Tota Gopinath.

The question about measuring the “melted stone” (impression of Gaura's SriDeha) by subtracting the extent of His arms was to find out how close could we get to His actual size. The stone has His full body length impression correct?





PS: I’m not doubting the arguments about if the disappearance was rather in Tota Gopinatha or not. I'm basically interest to learn about it.

Today, as I was walking through the Helsinki central railway station, amidst the crowd there was a peculiar sight. It was a man bent from his waist about 30 degrees forward. He must have been in the range of 220-230 centimeters tall. The reason for his being bent is his attempt to discuss with two of his friends, both about my size, 180 cm. There and then the awkwardness of what's been discussed here dawned to me. I should have had a camera with me. There's nothing like seeing to get a perspective on this.

Well comeback!