Talk: Tailed Beast


Archives
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

Tenzo

I think Tenzo should be removed from the listing of those who have total control of a beast. Unlike the originator of his power, Yamato's control is far from mastery 71.178.109.65 (talk) 15:22, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

0 tails

i don't think that the 0 tails should be on the list. that was something stupid the anime makers came up with, and we all know the anime isn't canon. besides how can it be a tailed beast if it has no tails? —This unsigned comment was made by 68.163.252.93 (talk • contribs) on 04:12, 29 August 2009 (UTC).

To add to that it is stated that the tailed beasts were a separation from the ten tails and only 9 were stated,Therefore it can be presumed that the so called zero tails is not a tailed beast and only a name the animators created to confuse viewers or to make it sound catchy.

I agree that the Zero-Tails shouldn't be listed, albeit not for the reasons you stated. I removed it and added a trivia point about it. --ShounenSuki ^{(talk | contribs)} 04:32, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Relantionship beetwen the tailed beasts

i was remembering the fight of naruto and gaara, we have to admit that battle was awesome, but it came a question to my mind, why wen naruto and gamabunta transform together into the nine-tailed fox why didn´t the shukkaku reconiced the fox, as far as i now the tailed-beast would have been created by the same power, so they kinda are brothers and sisters only with different chakra levels, ofcurse i wouldn´t expect that they have´d a good relantionship, i think that it more similar to the relantionship that the akatsuki members have beetwen them; and if we look into the relantionships that the chinjuriki have beetwen when they encounterd like naruto with gaara and yukimaru.

They only transform into the nine-tailed fox in the anime. In the manga it's a regular, one-tailed fox. Don't read too much into it. ~Snapper T o 04:16, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

well, what if the Shukaku recgognizes the kyuubi's chakra, and he knows that Gamabunta transformed isn't the Kyuubi?

but still the shukaku should have been shocked to see the image of the fox, maybe he should have sence a feeling of loosing the batle at the begining .

10-Tails

Shouldn't something about the 10-Tails be added here? Hidan13 (talk) 04:15, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

I put in the Ten Tailed Beast (talk)

Shouldn't we put the ten tails as the strongest.because it says the nine tails is the strongestBleach boy (talk) 22:14, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree (User talk:NarSasGaaNej

First off what does 10tails even look like and I do think that we should find out more if possible

"Current"

*cough* "Akatsuki has been capturing the tailed beasts and their hosts, and currently possess seven of the nine." what did we say about the use of the word current? ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) ^(talk) Oct 9, 2009 _@ 10:01 ^(UTC)

Uh...is it a bad word? Dartblaze (talk) 02:47, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

The wiki is supposed to be written independently of any specific point in the series. That phrase is written as if everyone was reading the recent manga, and requires it be edited every single time something changes in the Akatsuki status in the manga. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) ^(talk) Oct 11, 2009 _@ 02:41 ^(UTC)

So what is the concern here? Should the wiki be NOT written as if everyone was reading the recent manga? Then how should it be written? By writing about the 10-tails, we are already writing it as if everyone is reading the recent manga. Besides, what is that point about editing every time something changes in the manga? That is what has been going on always. Did anyone write about the Five Kages Meeting a year ago? Geijustu wa bakuhatsu da (talk) 15:49, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

What Dantman means is that every point in a story is considered 'current'. To someone who has just started reading the manga, the fight between Kakashi and Zabuza is current. For someone completely up-to-date, Madara telling about the Ten-Tails is current. This wiki is designed to cater to everyone.

This and the fact that the story changes every week means that words like current and recent have no meaning here and no place in the articles. --ShounenSuki ^{(talk | contribs)} 19:03, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

"This wiki is designed to cater to everyone." ... Sorry, but just what does "cater" mean here? How does writing about the Fourth Ninja War cater to someone who has just read or watched Kakashi's and Zabuza's battle? Geijustu wa bakuhatsu da (talk) 13:50, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

It means that someone who just read the battle between Kakashi and Zabuza should be able to find all the information relevant to them, just like someone who just read the latest manga should be able to. For example: in the last 200 or so chapters, Garra hasn't been a jinchūriki. However, removing the jinchūriki classification from his article would remove information relevant to the manga before he lost Shukaku. Since this Wiki should be relevant to every point in the series, we keep the jinchūriki status and note that he lost the Shukaku. --ShounenSuki ^{(talk | contribs)} 16:42, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

10 Tails

Shouldn't the 10 tails be the main subject of the article since it's the original tailed beast? It would be different if there were 9 bijuu plus the 10 tails, but the 9 bijuu are just pieces of the Juubi. Shouldn't you set up this page so that the juubi is the main subject and then say it's chakra was divided which leads to the info of the 9 bijuu? —This unsigned comment was made by 71.243.50.125 (talk • contribs) on 21:13, October 10, 2009.

That would put a major spoiler unnecessarily early on the page, and this is a entry article about the tailed beasts, that's what we have the Ten-Tailed Beast article for. The 9 separate tailed beasts are much more important to this article as they have much more influence over the series so far, Ten-Tails is only a recent development. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) ^(talk) Oct 11, 2009 _@ 05:04 ^(UTC)

Actually, the way Madara speaks about the Ten-Tails in the manga makes it seem as if the Ten-Tails isn't a Tailed Beast at all. It seems "Tailed Beasts" is how the nine parts of the Ten-Tails' chakra were called and not the Ten-Tails itself. --ShounenSuki ^{(talk | contribs)} 14:06, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

Why not? Following is what he said: "He (Rikudo Sage) saved the world from a monster .... Gaara, a part of that monster was sealed within you .... It is a fusion of all the tailed beasts, and possesses the strongest chakras ever .... the ten tailed beast, the jubi." Geijustu wa bakuhatsu da (talk) 15:56, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

Just for form, here's exactly what he said:

"He once saved the world, from a certain monster......" (「彼はかつて世界を救ったあるバケモノから......」, "Kare wa katsute sekai o sukutta, aru bakemono kara......")
"Gaara... You too had just a part of that monster sealed in you" (「我愛羅...お前もそのバケモノの一部が封印されていたにすぎない」, "Gaara... omae mo sono bakemono no ichibu ga fūin sarete ita ni suginai")
"It was an aggregation of all the Tailed Beasts... something that held the most powerful chakra... The Ten-Tails" (「そいつは尾獣全ての集合体...最強のチャクラを持つ存在...十尾だ」, "Soitsu wa Bijū subete no shūgōtai... Saikyō no chakura o motsu sonzai... Jūbi da")

Any way, the fact that Madara specifically says the Ten-Tails was an aggregation of "all the Tailed Beasts" means the Ten-Tails isn't considered a Tailed Beast itself. In other words, the Tailed Beasts is a named given to the nine parts that the Sage of the Six Paths split the Ten-Tails' chakra in. --ShounenSuki ^{(talk | contribs)} 19:16, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

Madara clearly calls the Ten-Tails as a monster. Now, don't tell me a monster and a beast are two different things. Geijustu wa bakuhatsu da (talk) 13:52, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

First of all, yes there is a difference, but that aside: Madara calls the Ten-Tails a monster (バケモノ, bakemono), not a Tailed Beast (尾獣, Bijū). By saying that the Ten-Tails is an aggregation of all the Tailed Beasts, Madara makes a clear distinction between the two. Tailed Beasts is a name given to the nine portions of the Ten-Tails' chakra. The Ten-Tails itself is not a Tailed Beast. --ShounenSuki ^{(talk | contribs)} 16:37, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

ShounenSuki, that's inconsistent on just two points : Its name and the fact that it has 10 tails. Other than that, your argument makes almost perfect sense. BlazeUchiha 16:41, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

Haven't other characters called some other Tailed Beasts like that, "bakemono"? I think Hidan called the Two Tails like that. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 00:09, April 28, 2010 (UTC)

@ BlazeUchiha: Tails and a "tail" name do not a Bijū make. As it is now, it seems "Bijū" is how the portions of the Ten-Tails' chakra were called. This means the Ten-Tails is, by definition, not a Bijū, as it is not a part of its own chakra.

@ Omnibender: Could be, but that wasn't really my point. My point was, partly by using the term bakemono instead of Bijū, created a clear distinction between the Ten-Tails and the Bijū. The way he spoke about the Ten-Tails, he implied taht it isn't considered a Bijū itself. It is rather logical, if you think about it. No-one knows about the Ten-Tails, so it is impossible for them to include it with the Bijū. --ShounenSuki ^{(talk | contribs)} 13:29, April 28, 2010 (UTC)

Zodiac

I was just looking at the names of the beasts and, noticed.

Monster Cat -> Chinese Zodiac: Rabbit -> Cat in Vietnam
Monkey -> Chinese Zodiac: Monkey
Dolphin Horse -> Chinese Zodiac: Horse
?Giant Ox -> Chinese Zodiac: Ox

Not sure about the others though; Shukaku, Giant Turtle, Slug, Horned Beetle, Fox. Maybe mention in article, about half of them being part of zodiac is a not likely a coincidence. Simant (talk) 18:18, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but this could easily be a coincidence. In fact, it would be ridiculous if it were anything other than that. Three animals match, with a fourth only matching if one considers a completely different culture. There is nothing else at all that connects the Tailed Beasts to the animals of the zodiac. --ShounenSuki ^{(talk | contribs)} 19:18, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

Power

shouldn't all the bijuu equal power and strength, other than 10 tails, since the 9 bijuu are but equal portions of chakra? --NarSasGaaNej (talk) 06:11, October 20, 2009 (UTC)

They had never said that the Tailed-Beasts are equal portions of the Ten-Tails, but merely that they are portions of the monster. We don’t know how much each got other than the Nine-Tails, which must have gotten the largest portion of chakra and strength.

But while we are speaking of the tailed-beast ranking system, Suki? Can I ask of you of a direct translation of what Kisame said during the time Killer Bee was charging at him in version 2? From what he said, there could be some merit to the whole tailed-ranking system, but I could have just merely read a bad translated manga release.

“Well, it is only one tail short of 9 after all...it must take an amazing amount of control to keep those chakras in check...”

That is what he said on the release I read, and from he said there, it makes me think there could be something to each tail means more stronger, but I could be wrong at this point. I also point out that the Samehada can only eat 6 tails of the Eight-Tails’ chakra at a time, point more towards the rank system, but that could also be at the 6 tails thing could be only from the Eight-Tails’ strength and not the beasts in general. --Juubi no Ryuu (talk) 22:37, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

Yokai

I've noticed in a lot fanfiction the kyuubi's chakra (and by extention the bijuu's) is refered to as yokai or youkai. Should we put that because stuff from fans minds like Kirabi's name really being Kira Hachi is on Kirabi's trivia section so can I put this in the trivia sec or not.--97.115.229.107 (talk) 06:45, November 15, 2009 (UTC)Nintendo-Fan

Yōkai (妖怪, monster, spirit, or demon) is the Japanese term given to various kinds of supernatural creatures. Kitsune, tanuki, oni, kappan, and tengu are just a few examples of yōkai. The Nine-Tailed Fox is also a very famous example of a yōkai. --ShounenSuki ^{(talk | contribs)} 15:43, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

Family

Now that we know that the tailed beasts all originated from a single beast, that makes them sorta family. Should we list them as such? Simant (talk) 19:34, December 19, 2009 (UTC)

I don't know. Family's kinda stretching it just a bit. But...maybe perhaps.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 21:28, December 19, 2009 (UTC)

Considering the facts that A) They are not even the same species in any way, shape, or form, B) They are living masses of pure energy that could possibly change their phyisical forms, and C) They have shown no interaction in each other's presence (Such as Shukaku not giving a care when Naruto uses the fox's chakra to summon Gamabunta) I'd say no. Interesting concept though lol. --Juubi no Ryuu (talk) 22:08, December 22, 2009 (UTC)

A) it doesn't matter that they aren't the same species, as long as they descend from a common ancestor, which in this case is a single "generation" away. B) What does it matter that they could change their forms? C) Who cares if they are unfriendly with each other, that does not affect their status of being related. (Sibling rivalry...) . Simant (talk) 00:08, December 23, 2009 (UTC)

A) They come from this "common ancestor"s energy, not nessesarly DNA, when one thinks of family, they either think of adoption or blood relation, neither of which I am not sure the Biju have. B) If they can change form, then it is possible they can change their DNA, though I am also not sure on that account. C) I didn't mean just unfriendly, Shukaku gives no attention to the chakra of the most powerful of the Tailed-beasts, either it thinks it can defeat the fox, or it is just unfamiliar with the fox and it's chakra, which would make sense seeing as the Sage "sent the nine chakras across the lands" or something like that. Anyway, we shouldn't put any family relation on these guys unless it is said in cannon, they are beings of pure energy, hard to define that into family terms. --Juubi no Ryuu (talk) 19:20, December 23, 2009 (UTC)

Eight Nine ????/

On 142 shippuden it mentions that they only have 6 out of 9 intead of seven.and im not being guided by subs it actually says there are 3 missingthat should be listed on trivia.

Ismell new anime arc

there is a new filler series about the six tailed slug, check it out search for utakata or rokubiShauli (talk) 22:09, January 11, 2010 (UTC)

Danzō?

Should we list Danzō as being able to control a tailed beast in the trivia section, because Madara said that he could control the Nine-Tailed Fox beacause he has both Uchiha and Hashirama's abilities? --98.211.195.17 (talk) 20:21, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Could is different between can control the Nine-Tails. Until we have point blank proof that this gamble allows him to be able to control the Nine-Tails, we have to assume at the moment he can't.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 20:25, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Is it relevant at all considering Danzō is dead and therefore unable to control anything? MocosII (talk) 20:25, April 12, 2010 (UTC)

He wasn't dead when the previous post was made... Dates on comments are good to look at. - SimAnt 20:32, April 12, 2010 (UTC)

Locked

Could this be unlocked please? I want to make an edit on how that the Fox's [comment] which indicates that the tailed beasts have indeed had contact with each other. All we have now is just a comment between the Ox and Bee and I would like to cut that down and improve it with our new information. Thomas Finlayson (talk) 01:36, June 4, 2010 (UTC)

You should be able to edit, only unregistered users can't edit it.--Deva 27 (talk) 01:38, June 4, 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm...Thanks. Thomas Finlayson (talk) 01:42, June 4, 2010 (UTC)

Affiliations

It was brought to attention that it's the jinchūriki that has the affiliation to a village, not the tailed beast. However, some beasts have their jinchūriki's affiliations listed as their own. Unless there's a obscure reference I'm not familiar with, all tailed beasts should either have the affiliation of their hosts, or no affiliation at all. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 23:32, June 8, 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps only the Tailed Beasts of those who have control over them, such as Killer Bee and Yagura. We don't know how much control the others had over their tailed beasts, so they (the tailed beasts) could have acted the same as the Nine-Tailed Fox.--Kagimizu-Seeya 'round~ 23:34, June 8, 2010 (UTC)

Three-Tails isn't listed with a Kirigakure affiliation, Two-Tails is listed with Kumogakure, Shukaku is listed with Sunagakure. Still doesn't make sense. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 00:04, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

Three-Tails should be former, Yugito had some control over Two-Tails, and Shukaku should be former because of his multiple Suna hosts and his capture.--Kagimizu-Seeya 'round~ 00:21, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

If some control accounts for the affiliation, might as well mark all the affiliations, since all the tailed beasts were trapped inside the hosts, and not being taken over by a beast is a sign of control. Either all should have the affiliation or none. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 01:08, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

The only tailed beast who was actually given a canon affiliation was Shukaku. The Nine-Tails was given no affiliation and the other tailed beasts never had any databook profiles. Perhaps it is best if we remove all of their affiliations, until we have confirmation. --ShounenSuki ^{(talk | contribs)} 10:48, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

Can they die when outside of their hosts?

The thing I was wondering was if the tailed beasts can die. I know that they can die if they are inside of their hosts, such as Kabuto tried with Naruto and Kurotsuchi advized for Bee and Naruto, but what about when they are not tied to a human? They are pure chakra, and chakra is energy, and the laws of physics state that energy is never destroyed, only converted. Granted you can permantently defeat them by yanking their sould out (like with the Fox in Minato Namikaze had/could(?) go all the way. But can they die, for good?

I ask since this would have solved a lot of problems if the beasts could be killed. Moreover, it will determine how difficult the Fourth Great Shinobi World War will be if they are fighting monsters they can beat to exhaustion, but cannot kill. Thomas Finlayson (talk) 20:39, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

In standard Japanese folklore, no. Gods and Demons typically are immortal, which is why they usually have to be sealed in some sacred shrine, tree or something when they go wild. So if Naruto follows this standard, then the tailed beasts are indeed immortal, unless you kill their host then they die right along with them. Now if this isn't the case, it is extreamly possible that it is just impossible for a normal person to kill one. They are creatures of pure, foul, and powerful chakra giving solid form. If they are killable, it would probably be really really hard, and would most likely result in a country being leveled.

All of this is speculative garble though.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 20:53, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

Still useful though. Moreover, it indicates that sealing jutsu might be essential to this conflict.

Will link this with the Fourth Great Shinobi World War. Thomas Finlayson (talk) 20:56, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

How is speculation useful here? (rhetorical) - SimAnt 20:59, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

I think there's a policy about this. Something about forms and social security numbers. Or was it forums? ~Snapper T o 21:02, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

1) How do you start one? 2) The fact that there does not appear to be a way to kill one if unleashed seems to be moving more towards fact than speculation 3)I think it is the numbers part. Thomas Finlayson (talk) 21:59, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

It's a bit off-topic, but gods and demons are not actually immortal in Japanese mythology. They are just extremely difficult to kill, if not impossible for humans. There are plenty of examples of gods and demons dying, like Izanami-no-Mikoto, Ukemochi-no-Kami, and Yamata-no-Orochi. --ShounenSuki ^{(talk | contribs)} 22:47, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

By difficulat to kill do you mean taking an insane amount of damage before going down, or a specific ritual or object needed (my Japanese mythology is severvely lacking)? Thomas Finlayson (talk) 22:49, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

I mean it generally seems to require another god. Izanami-no-Mikoto was the first living creature to ever have died after being fatally burned by giving birth to Kagutsuchi-no-Kami, who was then promptly killed by Izanagi-no-Mikoto with the Totsuka-no-Tsurugi. Ukemochi-no-Kami was killed by Tsukuyomi-no-Mikoto with a sword after disgusting her by vomiting up and defecating a meal for Amaterasu-Ōmikami, leading to the separation of night and day. Yamata-no-Orochi was killed by Susanoo-no-Mikoto with the Totsuka-no-Tsurugi, leading to his marriage with Kushinada-hime and the discovery of the Kusanagi-no-Tsurugi. --ShounenSuki ^{(talk | contribs)} 23:05, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

That would mean then that only way to defeat a tailed beast would be with another? Thomas Finlayson (talk) 23:14, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

It means there's no such thing as true immortality. Especially not in a world where mere mortal humans have all but ascended to godhood and actual gods have no problems doing the dirty work for humans. --ShounenSuki ^{(talk | contribs)} 23:58, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

Come again? Thomas Finlayson (talk) 00:58, June 12, 2010 (UTC)

Basically, a tailed beast can be killed, just like any other creature. They may be creatures of pure energy, however they still have physical, living breathing forms. Just their sheer power makes it near impossible for the average shinobi to kill them, perhaps a shinobi like A or Kisame could possibly due it, noting the fact they have chakra levels said to be similar to tailed-beasts. And the fact that they could be seperated from their chakra, as shown with the Jubi and Kyubi, they could easily be killed (though there is no known case), sealed away, or in the Kyubi's case, as dead as a will with no power can be inside a host. Also, it was my understanding that Japanese mythology Shinto, Kami and yokai WERE considered immortal, or at least Kami were, until the introduction of Buddhism in which they all become part of the cycle, birth, life, death, then rebirth? --Juubi no Ryuu (talk) 23:38, June 16, 2010 (UTC)

well,even if they had no host,yes,they could probaly still b "killed"...but their energy(chakra) would still remain,,,4 example,after the 9-tails rampage(yes i'm referin 2 sora),he left a part behind...

Trivia

So it’s state that Five-Tailed Dolphin Horse and the Seven-Tailed Horn Beetle where captured prior to Part II. That I’m ok with, but I think under trivia even though the time in which the tailed beasts where captured is not mentioned, it may be actually prior to the start of Part I.

Kisame in episode 10 of Shippuden, made the comment about how the extraction process may take longer due to Orichimaru not being with the Akatsuki any longer and since Orichimaru was no longer part of the group in Part I, it thus suggests that Orichimaru helped the Akatsuki with the other two tailed beasts. Therefore the Akatsuki must have cought those two tailed beast before the start of the series. —This unsigned comment was made by 41.27.5.156 (talk • contribs) .

Not really, it could mean that it would take longer because the technique is meant to be used with 10 members performing it instead of 9, Orochimaru simply being the example of the tenth member, likely because he still has his ring, and we still have no idea what they actually do. Zetsu also implied once that the fewer people performing, the longer it takes. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 23:08, July 24, 2010 (UTC)

Tailed beast images

I wanted to use this jpg image to replace the current one (the png one) because I cropped off the middle part that was included in the png one (I made the jpg have similar size and quality as the png, only better). But if you prefer png files, I'll upload the jpg one into a png file. Please reply. (P.S You can delete this image.) KazeKitsune (talk) 18:24, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Uh, should we put Naruto as a person who can control a beast. I doubt that now. Never mind.--99.70.93.27 (talk) 03:53, August 5, 2010 (UTC)