This page is an archive. Please do not edit this archive, instead try editing the page this archive originated from.

Hello, Fenrir7139 here. Anyway, I was thinking... Shouldn't somebody put up a Romaji Translation of the Japanese Text? I would, but I don't know Japanese... I'll look for a reliable translator and do it myself, if I need to. Peace. Fenrir7139 07:55, 4 May 2008 (UTC)Fenrir7139


This is a very meaty page, and though I personally love speculation and the information present here is plausible I don't believe that this article is alright in its present form. The main body is pure speculation. Good speculation yes, but still pure fiction. I believe that this should be corrected despite the limited information available on this group right now. Rayfire 17:52, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


Where on earth did most of the information in the history section come from? It certainly didn't come from the manga or databooks... --ShounenSuki 11:52, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

like someone said before, where did this info come from? also, please take out that Uchiha Madara is the mizukage who created the 7 swordsmen as that it currently just speculation. i also thought there was only 1 more mizukage after the one who created the 7 swordsman and that the kaguya clan doesn't exist anymore because of their attack on the village. also i don't think the village was starting...according to the mizukage page...they attacked during the 3rd mizukage's reign -July 4, 2008


Based on all the complaints here, I rewrote this page significantly and removed the blatantly false information, streamlined the structure, and got rid of the speculation. Stuff like Hoozuki Mangetsu being an ex-swordsmen... he was not. ever. We know that from the third databook. So, why was my edit reverted? It was not a joke edit or an attempt to be annoying. Are people just annoyed that I removed their bullshit, or is it actually the policy here to keep false information and speculation? Sure, my edit made the page a little shorter, but that's because that's literally the only information we know. 09:16, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Saying you rewrote the article is a bit much, the diffs only show you removing information from the article. But calm down with your comments a bit, those last two sentences comes across as hostile rather than assuming good faith.
An editor reverted you, likely because your original edit looked just like you were removing content from the article. Later on you made basically the same edit (which someone could view as a revert war) and reverted back to the original.
Thanks for coming to the talkpage about it. When there are topics like this, it's best to calmly discuss it with the other editors, sometimes they have other sources you may not have seen before. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Oct 5, 2008 @ 09:35 (UTC)
Also note that while we do go for facts, sometimes there are some small facts, but that don't amount to anything on their own. Basically the basis of speculations, while they can't be proven, and are many times false, they can sometimes offer nice subtle bits of info to the reader. In those kinds of cases we sometimes put speculations into a speculation section, or list facts on the page and give possibilities but mark them as unconfirmed. So flat out deleting speculation isn't always the best thing to do. For some examples; There's Minato Namikaze being Naruto Uzumaki's dad. Until it was confirmed that was never stated, but because there was a good bit of info in it, and it was widely believed, we put it in a speculation section. Same for Minato being Pain.
Basically the idea is to give all the facts to the reader, and let them make the assumptions. So even if something is speculation, we might put it in the article, but separate it from the facts, so that the reader can get all the info. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Oct 5, 2008 @ 09:50 (UTC)
With that in mind, I edited the page again, not removing anything but changing the speculated 'history' section to reflect that it is speculation. I don't think the page was really okay as it was (it was very hard to tell what was true and what wasn't), but I guess it didn't need speculation removed if that's just how things are around here. Thanks for your advice and I'll bear it in mind in future. 14:46, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Oh and hey someone just came and deleted everything that made it clear that that stuff was speculation, effectively reverting what I did, again. They didn't even bother to pay attention to grammar and sentence structure. Well whatever. This page still needs changing, because it still has a paragraph of pure invention presented as fact in the middle, but it looks like I'm not the one to do it. 19:50, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
What's in the history section isn't speculation, it's fact. The information is taken directly from the databooks and manga. --ShounenSuki 23:35, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Full Name

Ok, looking over the name again, there is no need for all those extra versions of the name. Plain and simply the name here is "Seven Ninja Swordsmen of the Mist", or "Seven Ninja Swordsmen" for short. "Seven Swordsmen" is a shortened version likely popularized by fandubs, and "Seven Shinobi Swordsmen" as the literal translation is the same as "Seven Ninja Swordsmen" which is what is officially used in the dub. I sent a bot around to fix up the names. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Oct 13, 2008 @ 08:08 (UTC)


If Suigetsu was trying to get all the swords, would Kishimoto add Raiga's swords to the manga just so it doesn't confuse us? also, we probably would end up seeing the rest of the swords and maybe some of the other members.—This unsigned comment was made by (talkcontribs) .

This isen't a forum, we have to wait and see. Jacce | Talk 05:34, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


Two questions:

  1. In what episode (preferably with time index) was Raiga called "Thunder of the Hidden Mist"?
  2. In what episode (preferably with time index) were Raiga's swords named?

--ShounenSuki (talk | contribs) 17:17, 1 August 2009 (UTC)


Did anybody note, that there's no double handled Sword to be seen in the pciture of the Seven? If the Swords are passed down, there should be one. Is the Info that he belongs to the seven confirmed?

The image is a) from the anime, and b) came out four years before Chojuro's debut. Don't give it too much thought to its finer details (or lack of). ~SnapperTo 22:03, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

i was watching something where kisame and itachi were talking. he said that if itachi died there would be no more uchihas which he diddnt know since sasuke was alive. kisame said if he died there would be no more seven swordsmen. shouldnt kisame know that the swords get passed down.

What chapter is this????

No because remember, Kisame killed his superior, and took the sword, thus becoming a SSHM, and because he took it, he probably didn't know if the rituals. —This unsigned comment was made by (talkcontribs) .


Under the literal translation,竜 meaning "dragon" is left out. It is literally "thunder dragon fang", assuming this kanji is correct.


Taking in consideration this phrase: "According to Suigetsu, the swords of the Seven Swordsmen are passed down from generation to generation." (I dont know how true it is), I would say that The Seven Swordsman weren't created by Yagura (fourth Mizukage). I think you should add that it is still unknown who created them. - 17/06/2010 (17:24) - Arijon

Raiga's Swords

Does anyone know where Raiga's swords were named exactly? —ShounenSuki (talk | contribs | translations) 18:47, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

Anime, I believe. It was a filler arc so I couldn't be bothered with watching it so I'm not sure, but it's been around long enough for me to doubt it's real.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 18:59, August 20, 2010 (UTC)
Well, that's the point. In a fit of insanity I decided to give the anime another chance, so I downloaded the arc that made me quit watching it: The Curry of Life arc.
I figured I might as well try and get the proper Japanese for the names of the characters and techniques and such, but I haven't been able to find where Raiga's swords were named. The official TV Tokyo site and the Japanese Wikipedia also don't name them.
I was hoping someone could give me an indication of where they were named, but if that doesn't come, I guess we should just consider it false and remove the name. —ShounenSuki (talk | contribs | translations) 19:27, August 20, 2010 (UTC)
I decided to scan the articles, and I was this close to clicking the episodes to watch online. But again, it's a filler arc, it's old and I don't want to sit through loading times. I'm going out at some point tonight but I will actually take to looking around tomorrow.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 21:41, August 20, 2010 (UTC)
But in my minor search, I checked Leafninja (yes the dark evil website nobody likes. But, they do have their uses) and they don't give it a name. It' very possible someone back at Wikipedia way back when named the sword after Fangs of Lightning jutsu he does with the swords. But again that requires actually watching the arc to be sure.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 21:44, August 20, 2010 (UTC)
Lets just remove it, and if anyone disagrees, let them provide the evidence. SimAnt 20:17, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

where are their swords?

I just read the newest chapter and they get sumoned. But i noticed that they dont have their swords. Why is that?Scott sswag (talk) 08:28, December 26, 2010 (UTC)

They'll probably get it the same way Zabuza got his, through plot convenience, most likely to be explained as some sort of summoning technique. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 14:58, December 26, 2010 (UTC)

How is former samehade owner going to use samehade because its in bee's posesion now?

We'll really have to wait to see whether or not these members will get back their swords. I highly doubt that they will if it's in the possession of other people or else wasn't salvaged by Kabuto somehow. However i think Zabuza has proven that he doesn't need a sword to overpower masses of opponents.--Cerez365 (talk) 19:38, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Ya but I'm pretty curious as to how Zabuza got the Executioners Blade back. It's gonna be funny when Jugo and Suigetsu don't find it. Amaterasu789 (talk) 00:51, December 30, 2010 (UTC)


Do we wait until each of them is introduced, or can we make articles on each of them already? I'm up for it. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 14:58, December 26, 2010 (UTC)

Lets wait until their names given.--Deva 27 (talk) 15:06, December 26, 2010 (UTC)


Could anyone tell me why kisame isnt here with the new chapter?

Kabuto summoned Kisame's master instead of him. Kabuto likely didn't have some of Kisame's DNA.--Deva 27 (talk) 17:33, December 26, 2010 (UTC)
Do they even know he's dead yet? —ShounenSuki (talk | contribs | translations) 17:53, December 26, 2010 (UTC)
i don't think so or else when Kabuto went to the island he would've (or did get) gotten dna samples--Cerez365 (talk) 18:09, December 26, 2010 (UTC)

Kabuto summoned the LAST generation of SSHM, and as Kisame only JUST died,Kabuto didn't get some of his dna in time, because in the chapters before, Kabuto already had the previous generation of SSHM, THEN Kisame died, but who knows, we'll have to wait and see in the next chapters

Change of picture

I think that the picture should be changed to the one of the ressurected Swordsman. I doubt I was the only one eagerly awaiting to see the faces of the Seven, and yes I know some people may be a bit pissed that Kisame isn't in this new picture but it can't be argued that the blue and black one from the anime is any clearer, or that all of their swords the Swordsman are known for can be seen. On the current one you can make out the silhouette of Zabuza's sword, what may be Kisame and a few katana,thats about it. I think the new one would serve the purpose of a picture better

In the anime there was picture of shiluete of akatsuki when jiraiya talked with the kakashi about akatsuki and naruto before itachi first time showed up.In manga that picture doesn't apeares.So that blue and black picture from anime isn't important.Only thing what is important is what kishimoto make in manga.They just puting some picture in anime so they could make more episodes and more time.Kishimoto is the creator and he decides anime stuff only puts some pictures or sceens in time to make more time like with the filers and else.YamatoTakeru (talk) 19:43, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Raiga = Fake?

Is the masked spagetti-like figure raiga? —This unsigned comment was made by (talkcontribs) .

I don't think so. And the word "fake" is such a harsh word. Think of Raiga more like...non-canon.--NinjaSheik 01:37, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

Or filler. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 01:40, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

Or that, too.--NinjaSheik 01:45, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

He (Raiga) should be separated from the canon "seven swordsmen" it is confusing. --Alastar 89 (talk) 05:26, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

He has a good point.--NinjaSheik 05:28, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

I think the best way to distinguish Raiga from the rest of the seven swordsmen swords that are canon is to put Raiga's swords under a "Anime only Swords" or "filler swords" this way it is separate from the canon swords; Make an entirely seperate subtopic in the contents of the article page. I don't know how to make these changes on the article, so can someone change the article. --Alastar 89 (talk) 05:38, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

That's not how material is dealt with on the wiki. All that's done is something to the effect of "In the anime..." ~SnapperTo 06:09, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

Of course, Raiga could also be of a different generation than this lot if one wants an explanation. We know two other swordspeople of the Mist not in the batch there, after all, Kisame and Chōjūrō. ZeroSD (talk) 06:12, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

As much as that's doubtful, we'll probably get confirmation soon enough. Kishimoto-sensei showed us the swordsmen, he'll show us the swords. Until that time, there's no reason to treat Raiga any different from the other anime-only things we cover on here. Just an anime-only tag will suffice. —ShounenSuki (talk | contribs | translations) 14:26, December 27, 2010 (UTC)
I was just worried that people might get it confused with the canon seven swordsmen...That is all.--Alastar 89 (talk) 05:08, December 29, 2010 (UTC)


is it possible to tell who Chōjūrō replaced out of them?Scott sswag (talk) 06:54, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

Not yet. Not without knowing which swordsmen wielded which sword. —ShounenSuki (talk | contribs | translations) 14:29, December 27, 2010 (UTC)


I don't agree with what is said about the bandages in the trivia. True, the summoned swordsmen's generation all have bandages around their neck, but what is said about the bandages around the swords of the current generation isn't that accurate. Chojuro has them, but so has Kisame who, according to the databooks, is older than Zabuza. Plus, if remember it correctly, there were already bandages around Samehada by the time of the previous wielder. So, I think the bandages around the swords are a characteristic of some of the swords and not of the current swordsmen. (talk) 19:55, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, with Kisame from the previous generation as well... Just change the point to say most swordsmen either have bandages around their neck or their swords. Yatanogarasu 20:01, December 27, 2010 (UTC)


could the guy behind Zabuza be him??-- (talk) 23:06, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

If it is, it'll be a plothole, since the Third Databook stated that Mangetsu died without becoming a Swordsmen of the Mist. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 23:07, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

oh. i thought he did. ah rats, i would of had liked to see him in action. Oh well, i suppose we'll see Suigetsu VS Zabuza soon, then.-- (talk) 23:13, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but there is a large possibility that Suigetsu will not take action with the 5 villages and help Zabuza and the others. Amaterasu789 (talk) 00:36, January 8, 2011 (UTC)

Is Mangetsu the original wielder of Hiramekaeri even though he mastered all 7 swords? If not then does that make Chōjūrō one of the original swordsmen? And if thats true doesn't that mean that there are 8 swordsmen? (talk) 03:52, January 19, 2011 (UTC)

  1. I think you mean the previous generation of swordsmen, not original, right? And for Mangetsu, look at the 4th trivia point.
  2. I highly doubt Chōjūrō is of the previous generation of swordsmen because they were all revived by Kabuto Yakushi, and he is obviously not in the list of those mentioned.
  3. And as far as there being 8 members currently, that is incorrect. "There can only be seven members at a time, hence the name." Try not to get confused with the number of people in the group, Kabuto messed it all up with bringing back the dead and whatnot. ~ Fmakck - Talk - Contributions 04:16, January 19, 2011 (UTC)

far right

is the guy or girl that is the farthest right colud he or she be what haku is.. a hunter-nin i think it is. if so should we put that in the trivia with the one that says there have been 3 missing-nin and a spy.Scott sswag (talk) 08:06, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

read what you just said...'could', 'i think', 'if so' that's all speculation which should be dealt with in time. Also, how would this affect there being 3 missing nin and a spy?--Cerez365 (talk) 11:46, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

i was talking about this-At least three of the members became missing-nin, while one was discovered to be a traitor, leaking confidential information to other villages- from the trivia section. and add that he was a hunter-nin to it.Scott sswag (talk) 08:09, December 29, 2010 (UTC)


I'm a bit confused about what generation Zabuza is from? Was he apart of the Seven Swordsmen when Kisame was in it also? Or was he in it way before or after? If so, was he apart of the group with the Previous Generation (Chapter 522) ?

Zabuza is the previous generation and yes he was in the same gen as Kisame but Kisame died on the Turtle Island on which Kauboto didn't have time to gather dna so he revived Kisame's predecessor. Considering he has broke off with teh mist, Kisame is previous gen. The only confirmed "current" gen is Chojuro and sign your posts.Umishiru (talk) 17:13, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Anonymous Kisame would not be a member of the previous generation because he had to kill his master to obtain his sword thus though he is older than Zabuza ( by only 3 years ) he would not have been an original member of the previous generation

The generations of the Swordsmen aren't as clear-cut as this. It's like with the kage. Some villages have had five, other only three. The same is true for the Swordsmen. Kisame is technically speaking the current generation of the Samehada wielders, Chōjūrō of the Hiramekarei wielders, and Suigetsu of the Kubikiri Hōchō wielders. Their direct predecessors have now been summoned, including the direct predecessors of the wielders of the other four swords.
It could be argued that Kisame has, in a way, been replaced by Killer B, but I don't think Kabuto even knows about Kisame's death, so that is unimportant. —ShounenSuki (talk | contribs | translations) 18:31, December 28, 2010 (UTC)
  • White Fang Im new to this so bear with me. The Seven Swordsmen were said to have appeared suddenly in a great time of turmoil in The Hidden Mist Village. They consist of only the greatest blade-wielding shinobi in the village. In reference to this discussion, I think the implication was made by the author when he said Zabuza killed his entire graduating class. And as seen from Chojuro, you can be made a swordsman at a relatively young age dependent upon your skill. I believe Zabuza was made a swordsman at a relatively young age, or at very least years before Kisame TOOK his position. Kisame can't have been much younger than he was at the time of his death seeing as he was still LOOKED relatively the same as when he was introduced. At least a grace period of a 10 years. Hence, I believe Zabuza was from the previous generation and Kisame was from the current generation. And another question. I believe Kabuto knows of Kisames death. So does anyone think that even though Kisame commited suicide in such a spectacular fashion, Do you think he left behind enough DNA to give Kabuto enough to resurrect him?
There is no need for Zabuza to have become a Swordsmen before Kisame for him to be considered of the previous generation and not Kisame. —ShounenSuki (talk | contribs | translations) 03:37, December 29, 2010 (UTC)
  • BelugaBaleia*

Kisame left a pool of blood, if I'm not mistaken. There was enough DNA alright. —This unsigned comment was made by (talkcontribs) .

We don't know if Akatsuki knows Kisame is dead. And while likely, we don't know if Kabuto acquired that. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 01:12, December 31, 2010 (UTC)

One question why in chapter 522 kishimoto wrote ,,The last generation of seven swordsmen.I mean if that chroujo is curent swordsmen and zabuza was a member of last generation I mean LOL kishimoto makes some clear mistakes first he wrote on chapter 520 at end,, next time gaaras division clashes with the enemy but he made kakashi division and division 2 clashes and gaara and his division was not in even one picture.That tell us only one thing, kishimoto is just like us a human being and he can make very often mistakes.I mean the guy is working whole year 24 seven he has to make 17 to 20 pages with 4 to 6 pictures, he has to make the story, so he is a human and don't be so opsest, because making story like naruto with all those ideas that is talent he is not like those guys who makes comics and cartoons in wich every episode is diferent.So don't argue so much, resopect what he is doing for us. —This unsigned comment was made by YamatoTakeru (talkcontribs) .

^^ Very fanboyish response, but if you are trying to say that everyone makes mistakes, then I agree with you. One question though: What "clear mistake" did he make in Ch. 520? ~ Fmakck - Talk - Contributions 00:29, January 11, 2011 (UTC)
Kishimoto said "Next issue: Gaara's division clashes with the enemy!" Gaara is the leader of all five divisions, so I don't think it was a mistake.--Acunamatata4619 (talk) 00:03, January 14, 2011 (UTC)
The next chapter previews have never been accurate. Ever. I don't think they're even written by Kishimoto-sensei himself. —ShounenSuki (talk | contribs | translations) 00:23, January 14, 2011 (UTC)

Lets start from begining shall we first Zabuza in land of waves arc it is not mentioned that he is one of seven sworsmen and there are no mentioning of swordsmens,the swordsmen are mentioned when kisame showed up, then with itachi when he first showed up he is portraited like monster but from madar's words itachi was traumitize by war and that is why he killed his clan(now that is not a mistake but it is not comon or it is hard to explain), then sasuke he hated itachi he wanted him dead he killed him and than madara show up tells him story that nobody can aprove and sudenlly sasuke who hated itachi now hates leaf vilage and everybody in it.Sasuke told naruto how the great ninja can reads oponents mind and hart but he sasuke can't reads nothing about madara. And madara was meeting itachi on night of uchiha masacre but sasuke who is genious can't figure out that madara helped itachi to kill the clan.Then naruto he is at one point stupid very stupid but when fights he is able to defite pain who is near like sage of six paths, but when comes to respect naruto is always beaten up by everybody with exception of some people.Then his reletionship withsasuke like naruto is opsesed first he hates sasuke and when sakura starts crying and pleaing to returne sasuke than he goes and risc his life.And all the time sasuke hates naruto and naruto wants to return sasuke and des not see anything he is even not concerned in sakura anymore.So Kishimoto goes from one angle to another.First gaara is evil and hates world than its sasuke.I know it good story great drawing and everything but you are never sure with kishi what he is going to do.And I notice that some caracter never even spoken in manga sarutobi hrunzen spoke with jiraya when he was child but there never was talk betven them as jiraya grovn man.And all konha 11 hardly speak beatwen one another only in their teams they speak with their team mates.And if sasuke is strong as deidara how come sasuke wasn't able to defete gaara and deidara killed gaara(but gaara is alive).So when is all puted together kishimoto(mabo)sensei is only human, not god, he do it wery good, has done something not I or anybody here can do, or anybody else.I think he is beter in drawing than gendy tartakovsky witch cartoons are for children age 2 and 3(but only that one year of life should be spented on his cartoons).I am wery frustrated because in my country I have nobody who likes naruto, they stoped airing it and there is no magic watching it on computer, so forgive my ruthnes and long writing but you all and I got one thing in common that is bridge and that is naruto.We are people who shares the same interest and we use our kwnolage to helpe those who wants to know a little more about naruto and to learn the point in life and have fun.That is all.YamatoTakeru (talk) 20:56, January 15, 2011 (UTC)


Will The Seven Ninja Swordsmen Of The Mist have their swords? Or I should better say Will kabuto be able to summon the Seven Ninja's Swords.

White Fang I dont believe they will. It was never stated that the Seven Swordsman group was disbanded. It even has to be stated that they may still be in effect since Chojuro is said to be apart of the group. I think its safe to make the assumption that the swordsmen of the current generation are still wielding their swords. Again, this is all speculation at this point. Kishi likes throwing surprises in the story line. I still have no idea how Zabuza got his sword back, seeing as it was with the enemy in the Iron country...
The Seven Swordsmen aren't a tightly-knit team. There is no true group, just seven individuals wielding seven specific swords. It was stated in the second databook that most of the Seven Swordsmen had become missing-nin, starting with Kisame. —ShounenSuki (talk | contribs | translations) 03:36, December 29, 2010 (UTC)

And Chojuro is the only one that hasn't gone rogue and in fact is greatly loyal to the 5th Mizukage. I'd be surprised if he was actually a spy who somehow still stayed alive and loyal to Gato. But there is no need for a spy at this point in the story because of the war, but there still is a chance that he could suddenly turn on the ninja world and murder the Mizukage. Just my prediction. Amaterasu789 (talk) 00:31, January 8, 2011 (UTC)

Site problem

Well, I think something's wrong with the infobox Oo Seelentau 愛 00:07, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

The site in general has been a bit wonky for about 8 hours now, it comes and goes. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 00:16, January 13, 2011 (UTC)
[1] SimAnt 00:18, January 13, 2011 (UTC)
Has it broken anything we make heavy use of? And by the way, is that Vector skin the same thing Wikipedia is using? Should we use it over the Wikia skin? Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 00:23, January 13, 2011 (UTC)
Wikia just has to break everything forever don't they?--TheUltimate3 ~Aspect of Wiki ~ 01:15, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

Raiga's Twin Swords Are No Longer Anime Only

It appears that Raiga's Twin Swords or there exact duplicates are now in the manga. I guess Raiga either stole it and pretended to be a member of the seven swords, or was actually a member. Dang I didn't like him personally... --Dragon Hacker (talk) 02:29, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

Well actually I guess its called now "Fang" and it sadley fits the image and description perfectly... I wonder if he is now putting in movie and anime stuff in the manga like the four resurrected with bloodlimits from the movie... will crystal release make a comback and complete the table too. Sorry for rambling on. --Dragon Hacker (talk) 02:31, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

Since Raiga's swords appeared in the manga, they are canon. The only explanation I can think is: Raiga is Ringo's sucessor and replaced him in the group (and defected at some point after that). However, the generation summonned in the manga is the previous one, so he is absent, just like Kisame and Chojuro. Raiga couldn't be ressurrected anyway, he destroyed his own body with lightning. Shadow Abyss (talk) 18:41, January 13, 2011 (UTC)
you all need to remember that while Kishimoto did essentially make the swords canon, the character Raiga still isn't.--Cerez365 (talk) 18:45, January 13, 2011 (UTC)
I said his swords are canon, not the character. I'm just trying to think in something without messing up the filler arc. But it is enough to make me think about how much Kishimoto interferes in some fillers. He even borrowed filler character designs for Gari, Pakura and Chukichi, and now Raiga's swords are in the manga as well. Shadow Abyss (talk) 18:52, January 13, 2011 (UTC)
Or maybe Kishimoto wants the anime and manga to flow smoothly so he adapts things that would otherwise conflict. SimAnt 19:04, January 13, 2011 (UTC)
He doesn't seem to be interested in doing that with the films, though ^^ There are actually two possible explanations here: Either Kishimoto-sensei decided he liked the idea of the swords eno9ugh to put them in, or he gave the design of the swords to the anime creators in the first place. The same situations apply to the designs of the kekkei genkai users from the film. With both, I think the latter situation is most likely. Raiga, however, has a typical anime design and is most likely not a Kishimoto-original design.
Raiga is also most likely not canon. If Kabuto managed to obtain the swords, it would mean he would know Raiga's dead and he would have summoned him, rather than the previous owner. —ShounenSuki (talk | contribs | translations) 19:25, January 13, 2011 (UTC)
TheUltimate3's Canon Opinion: Because the wiki counts both the anime and manga as equal canon (with priority to the manga), Ringo had the swords, he died and somehow Raiga got them,then he died. Because he was clearly of fail Kabuto didn't care to raise him and instead just got the original more badass wielder.
TheUltimate3's Observational Opinion: Either Kishimoto liked the swords, the character designs, whatever from the filler/movies enough to canonize them, or he gave them to the animation studios himself. Either way they were in one way or another, canonized in the manga, some more workable than others, for example, the Lighting Fang (I feel I can get away with using this name now) could easily fit in the manga/anime continuity one just has to consider Raiga as being a fail ninja. The three ninja from the film merely got their appearance lifted from the movie and that's it.
What I think we should be more worried about is how Wikia has once again decided to jack crap up!!!--TheUltimate3 ~Aspect of Wiki ~ 19:54, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

Image of all the Members

I have a translated image of the seven members. Should I up load them to their respective characters? --KiumaruHamachi (talk) 22:07, January 13, 2011 (UTC)KiumaruHamachi

No. ~SnapperTo 22:13, January 13, 2011 (UTC)
Nope. We don't use images with English translations. Raws are preferred. Refer to the image policy. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 22:13, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

Change Red Link

Can we remove Previous Samehada Wielder from the list and add instead? I would do it but I don't know how to edit info boxes.Umishiru (talk) 01:09, January 14, 2011 (UTC)

Its fixed. Thanks.Umishiru (talk) 01:43, January 14, 2011 (UTC)


Are most members of the previous generation (the ones Kabuto revived) missing-nins? I mean, the swords fell out of Kirigakure's possession, one by one, as their masters defect they take the swords along with them, until only Hiramekarei remains. That being said, we know that the Kubikiribōchō and Samehada are taken away by Zabuza and Kisame, respectively. Since the remaining four swords were also no longer in Kiri, that means their owners took them away with their defection. From that, shouldn't we infer: Jinin, Kushimaru, Jinpachi and Ameyuri are missing-nins? They defected and took the swords away from the village. We know that Fuguki is killed before he could defect, and Mangetsu is not a sword owner (or maybe he passed on Hiramekarei after his death, before he could take it with him). Yatanogarasu 03:03, January 15, 2011 (UTC)

No, that's speculation. It could have been there predecessors who took the swords, or they could have been stolen. We don't know how they were taken.--Deva 27 (talk) 03:08, January 15, 2011 (UTC)

Swords Section

I was wondering why there was such a long and detailed section for the swords when they each have their own article. —ShounenSuki (talk | contribs | translations) 17:12, January 15, 2011 (UTC)

It's not really that long, but I understand what you're trying to say. I suggest having just the sword's name under the list (with translations of course) with a simple link to the sword's page. ~ Fmakck - Talk - Contributions 04:21, January 19, 2011 (UTC)
He was referring to this version of the article. As you can see, the descriptions have since been shortened. ~SnapperTo 06:50, January 19, 2011 (UTC)

The Name's

The name of sword's, in the really is the Bakutō,Daitō,Dantō, etc, right? Because I was thinking, and the names kiba, Shibuki, nuibari according to the rōmaji are nicknames, but the names actually came from Blastsword (bakutō), Longsword (chōtō), right?LosErmanos - Talk - Contributions 07:05, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

I would say the -tō names are not names at all, but types. Daitō, chōtō, and dontō are even real-life sword types, albeit quite different from the Naruto versions. —ShounenSuki (talk | contribs | translations) 10:05, January 19, 2011 (UTC)

Because I understood that the name of the real swords were those types you mentioned, but then came the nicknames like the fang's(Kiba) that arose in my mind because those blades that come out of the real blade of the sword.But thanks for the your answer. LosErmanos - Talk - Contributions 11:21, January 13, 2011 (UTC) I really thought it was equal to that Tantō is only one type, there is only one type that everyone can use.LosErmanos - Talk - Contributions 11:27, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

Last generation?

Isn't the strongest generation of the Seven Shinobi Swordsmen technically the last of them? Even if the other swords were past down, Zabuza's wasn't... It was used to mark his grave and stolen. I know its arguable that murder and taking the sword is how Kisame became a member but even if that is the case then Suigestsu would be a member which we all know he isn't. Cutting to the chase, there aren't Seven of them can we really call Chōjūrō/Kisame the current generation of the Seven Shinobi Swordsman? I think the groups currently far too damaged to be recognised as such. Also, Hiramekarei and Samehada were the only swords not to get summoned to the previous generation, and they had peole weilding them (Killer Bee and Chōjūrō) which strongly suggests the others were just discarded after their last weilder's death..

10TailedDemonChild (talk) 21:04, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

Im confused but imma try and clear things up cause this is a confusing topic

OKAY, Imma state that Sugetsu's brother was the best of the other 6 seven swordsman of his generation since he learned to use all of the swords. The samehada is the strongest sword since its been stated by many people. Also to point out that its got some killer ability. Sugestu's brother weilded the Himereki, since everyone else wielded another blade(Zabuza,Executioner Blade)(Fugkaku,Samehada)(Amero(however you spell it)Lightning Fangs)(Kushinaru, Needle-Longsword)(Jijin,Defence Breaking sword)(eyepatch guy,explosion sword). Mangetsu had 4 of the swords in a scroll(needle, lightning fang, explosion and guard breaker) the executioner blade somehow got to Zabuza, but it defenatly wasn't by Mangetsu, the samehada was with Killer Bee and the Himereki was with Chojoru. Serious question, how the f*** did Mangetsu get the lightning fangs, weren't the at the bottom of the river????? I know it was a filler but u added part of the filler and not the whole thing... 1st question, does the best generation mean Zabuza was the best weilding executioner blader and so on? i mean if Fugkaku is better than Kisame then thats badass. 2nd question, didnt it say somewhere the blades have powers, lets look at the powers. Samehada, chakra absorbing, ok, thats a power, Executioner, regenerating lost parts, eeeh but its still a power, Himereki, chakra hammers, ok... power, Lightning Fangs, lightning power, thats a power, but those are the only ones with a unique thing that cant be made again, Guard Breaking sword, its a sword that u hit with a hammer. WTF how s that a unique sword with a power, Explosive Sword, i mean seriously, anybody could a sword and put a roll of explosive tags on it, Needle Sword, thats just a stabbing sword with dentle floss at the end, not really powerful or unique —This unsigned comment was made by (talkcontribs) .

First, you can post just once. Second, sign your posts with four tildes. Your four first sentences were pointless because you didn't say anything we didn't know already. Just because the Kiba sword is a canon immigrant, it doesn't mean its history is as well. The resurrected generation was said to be the most powerful. Whether that means they were the most powerful group, or just the most powerful ones ever to wield each sword is beyond any of us, unless there's something in the words used to describe them in Japanese that got lost in translation. This isn't a place to complain about the stuff you don't like about the series. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 03:03, January 28, 2011 (UTC)


At the end of the last chapter there was a colored picture of the seven swordsmen of the hidden mist, does that make it the colors that they actually looked like. —This unsigned comment was made by (talkcontribs) .

That is called fanart. That coloring looks nothing like what Kishimoto does when he colors. Is it really that hard to notice its deviantart url in the bottom left corner? I weep for humanity. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 23:52, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

English Nicknames

Ok, so the Executioner's Blade is a seversword. That makes sense. It severs. Samehada is a greatsword. That makes sense. It's huge. The Sewing Sword is a longsword. That makes sense. It's long. Fang is thundersword. That makes sense. They shoot lightning. The Explosive sword is blastsword. That makes sense. It has explosive tags on it. BUT, Hiramekarei is twinsword and the hammmer/axe/chain sword is bluntsword? Why? Hiramekarei should be bluntsword: It turns into a hammer. And the other one should be twinsword. There's 2 parts chained together. I understand the picture has twinsword shaded, but thats just ridiculous. Explain to me hoe Hirameikarei is twinsword. I'll let the actual doubleswords go because theres nothing else that can be thundersword, but come on! Hiramekarei is definitely one sword. (talk) 22:26, April 22, 2011 (UTC)

Bluntsword is called that because it works in conjunction with a hammer to be effective. Hiramekarei has two handles ergo twin sword. Also, read the articles, that'll help.--Cerez365™☺ 22:29, April 22, 2011 (UTC)
There's also the fact that "Twinsword" is one of the three swords Mangetsu is unable to summon. Since Samehada and the Executioner's wouldn't be the twinsword, that only leaves Hiramekarei. ~SnapperTo 02:03, April 23, 2011 (UTC)
Remember that we haven't seen the full extent of Hiramekarei's workings. The name and the twin handles imply it might be able to split into two swords. —ShounenSuki (talk | contribs | translations) 06:43, April 23, 2011 (UTC)


was the swords created by someone (not implying madara) or just there in the world, like the 10 tails and humans?—This unsigned comment was made by (talkcontribs) .

We don't know that much about them, other then the fact that they are passed down through each generation.--Hohenheim   Talk to Me ◕ ‿‿ ◕  03:10, June 8, 2011 (UTC)

an article only for the swords?

should it be created? to make it easier to find and search for a list/overview of them. In my case, when I was looking to learn more only about the swords I didn't realize right away that the information would be "hidden" in the swordsmen article, which in my mind would focus on the "organization", the members, the generations and etc. Holyn (talk) 01:32, June 25, 2011 (UTC)

The swords have their own pages, a list of them here is enough. If a page were to be created, what would go there that isn't already in their individual pages?--Deva 27 01:42, June 25, 2011 (UTC)
we could take the section about the swords and move it to a new page, leaving a simple list of names (with links to each sword article) and a link to the full article about the set of swords. and complement this new article .. I know there were some versions of that section that were long and could be used to compose the page. for example: who are and were the users of each sword.. we don't have an overview of that, someone would have to go to each sword article to find out.. No new information will actually be added, it is only a means of organizing the content... Holyn (talk) 02:10, June 25, 2011 (UTC)

I don't see any point in separate article. There is a list on this page, which is relevant to the Seven Swordsmen. The list contains basic information about the swords, and if others want to know more about the swords or their wielders they can click the link.--Deva 27 02:36, June 25, 2011 (UTC)