Talk:Jinchūriki

Anime
Its mentioned in a lot of articles that in the anime Fu and Han were mentioned to have loathed humanity didn't Deidara say the same in the manga? Ch 266 Page 16 119.154.6.183 (talk) 15:18, January 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * He said generally, not specifically about Fū or Han who could have had different relationships with their village. Kishimoto might have an entirely different background story planned for them.--Cerez365™Hyūga Symbol.svg 15:20, January 18, 2012 (UTC)


 * Was it said in the anime about Han and Fu? 119.154.6.183 (talk) 15:22, January 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * Deidara used the same words, he said that the captured hosts were hated by their villages. In both the manga and the anime, Shukaku was the third beast to be captured, leaving Utakata, Han and Fū as potential "hated-by-their-village,-glad-they're-dead" hosts. Because the anime made that arc showing Utakata, that makes Han and Fū those already captured hosts. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 17:44, January 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * Ohhh mk. So that I suppose is why it can't be said that Deidara meant Han and Fū because we don't know how Utakata fits into it?--Cerez365™Hyūga Symbol.svg 17:47, January 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if I understood your question. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 18:00, January 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * I was really just stating my understanding of it/rambling I suppose. But I meant that the manga reference can't be made since we don't know canonically when Utakata was captured so he might just be one of the two that were hated.--Cerez365™Hyūga Symbol.svg 18:04, January 18, 2012 (UTC)

Huh
How are the jinchuuriki's souls still here?!?!?!? --Asian711 (talk) 22:23, February 1, 2012 (UTC)

It would appear to be that way. Hard to say, we'll just have to wait and see. Skitts (talk) 22:27, February 1, 2012 (UTC)

Edo Tensei bounds souls to bodies why wouldn't they be there?--Cerez365™ 22:28, February 1, 2012 (UTC)

Oh yeah, dur. My brain dun goof'd. Skitts (talk) 22:41, February 1, 2012 (UTC)

Repeated vandalism
Protection needed to this page, the following line keeps being changed from: "Such examples are Naruto, Killer B, and the most prominent being Gaara."

to "Such examples are Gaara, Killer B, and the most prominent being Naruto." --speysider (talk) 13:29, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Abilities
We all know that the jinchuriki (Yugito, Yagura, Roshi, Han, Utakata, Fu) were revived. Each of them displayed almost full control over their respective tailed beasts while being controlled by Tobi. My question is that the control and abilities they displayed after their resurrection, are those skills really their own? Should these controlled abilities be written in their abilities section ? 119.154.69.138 (talk) 08:48, February 4, 2012 (UTC)

No. That was Tobi. None of them except for Yagura were noted to have that level of control while alive. Skitts (talk) 09:02, February 4, 2012 (UTC)

So should all of that controlled.....control be listed on their character and jinchuriki forms pages? 119.154.69.138 (talk) 09:17, February 4, 2012 (UTC)

I think it is already. If not, it's at least on their Jinchuriki forms page. Skitts (talk) 09:36, February 4, 2012 (UTC)

If its not really their own control then how can we write it in their articles ? 119.154.69.138 (talk) 09:42, February 4, 2012 (UTC)

Those transformations are on their Jincuriki forms page as I thought, since those pages just display all shown forms of that character, circumstances be damned. I would assume they're already in their articles in the Shinobi World War Arc section. It's not like we put it in their abilities section as their own skill or something. Skitts (talk) 11:27, February 4, 2012 (UTC)

If its not their control or skill can they be listed as users of Tailed beast abilities such as Leech Sap? And its noted about their manipulated control on their abilities section, what about that? 119.154.26.230 (talk) 15:36, February 4, 2012 (UTC)
 * It is their skill they're jinchuriki. Whether or not they could perform feats like complete transformations without losing themselves is an entirely different story that however, doesn't mean that they aren't the ones performing the feats. All Tobi's doing is telling them to attack and such. I think the respective articles make it obvious enough of the circumstances under which they're using it.--Cerez365™Hyūga Symbol.svg 15:41, February 4, 2012 (UTC)

Compatibility
Shouldn't the article mention that the soon-to-be Jinchuriki must be compatible in some way to host the beast? Both Chiyo and Killer B's cousin mention this if I remember correctly. Skitts (talk) 04:37, February 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * Bump. Skitts (talk) 16:07, February 29, 2012 (UTC)

We don't know what the compatibility is all about. --Elveonora (talk) 16:19, February 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * I didn't say we did, but the opposite in fact. I think that something along the lines of "To host a Tailed Beast, the intended host must be compatible in some way to host the beast" would do just fine. Skitts (talk) 16:23, February 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * Huh, I thought this was mentioned already. I'll add it, though I would appreciate someone hunting those references. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 20:55, February 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * I added those references the other day by the way. I was right, both B's cousin and Chiyo were the one's that brought iit up about their villages' respective Tailed Beasts. Skitts (talk) 06:18, March 4, 2012 (UTC)

Trivia
Shouldn't the trivia be changed from saying that Gaara retained his abilities after death to jinchuriki that are resurrected or reincarnated retain their tailed beast abilities. 119.154.5.19 (talk) 19:01, March 23, 2012 (UTC)


 * The jinchuriki resurrected by the Impure World Resurrection had their demons resealed into them. Gaara had his demon removed, got his life back, but kept his demon based powers.--TheUltimate3 ~Keeper of Lore~ 20:27, March 23, 2012 (UTC)

Not to mention Edos retain ALL the abilities they had in life. As stated they also had the actual beasts re-sealed so that's why.--Elveonora (talk) 04:47, March 24, 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually we can't say that's true per se for jinchuriki especially since we haven't gotten to see the jinchuriki fight without the beasts.--Cerez365™Hyūga Symbol.svg 11:55, March 24, 2012 (UTC)

Tailed Beast Shell
Shouldnt we change Partial transformation for jinchuuriki into Tailed Beast Shell since it appears that The jinchuuriki's human body doesnt transform into the beasts on a celluar level. examples- when naruto fought shukaku gaara's body came out of his head showing gaara didnt transform into sand, showing his tailed beast intial form was just a shroud. and how Goku handed naruto roshi's body when he was transformed into him (UubPathnik (talk) 02:51, April 1, 2012 (UTC))

The only thing that change the jinchuuriki make are their initial form (UubPathnik (talk) 03:04, April 1, 2012 (UTC))

Not really, Gaara's case is different and Killer B was shown to transform parts of his own body into that of Eight-Tails. Also the part about Goku, chapter please ? --Elveonora (talk) 15:52, April 1, 2012 (UTC)

In chapter 570 goku drops roshi's body on naruto. and in naruto's 6 tailed form he formed bone structures outside his body, and later killerbee did the same with his lariat (UubPathnik (talk))

That's 2 different things. --Elveonora (talk) 22:35, April 7, 2012 (UTC)

It shows how Naruto and Bee's bones didnt grow. they never grew into their tailed beasts, their chakra shrouds grew into tailed beasts. (UubPathnik (talk) 18:43, April 29, 2012 (UTC)) It would also explain why their clothes were still intact (UubPathnik (talk) 01:19, May 10, 2012 (UTC))

I'm confused. Jinchuriki can transform into their Tailed Beast. And considering once you've gotten to B's level that you can manifest actual parts of the Beast and even change into it's actual body, I don't get where this 'not on a cellular level' junk is coming from. Naruto's most recent power-up was an imperfect one, as Kurama noted, so that can't really be taken as a standard. Skitts (talk) 01:42, May 10, 2012 (UTC)

I'm saying maybe Killerbee manipulated where there chakra shroud would manifest on his body instead of it completely wrapping around him. and had the chakra transform into the Tailed Beast limbs (UubPathnik (talk) 19:38, June 18, 2012 (UTC))

When they use Version 2 and Full Transformation, they really do transform. But they can change the chakra shroud into a physical part of their Tailed Beast.--Elveonora (talk) 20:32, June 18, 2012 (UTC)

Version 2 is the same as the original chakra shroud it's just more in depth, with the addition of the jinchuuriki's blood and more chakra. An example would be like the kid in the Super Robot Monkey Team Hyperforce Go with the Green Gorilla (UubPathnik (talk) 01:52, June 19, 2012 (UTC))

No. There are also physical parts of a Tailed Beasts in Version 2 like: bones, fur, horns, tails, claws, wings, arms, ears, carapace etc. You can see clearly it's not just chakra mixed with blood but the hosts themselves partially transformed. Also your "not cellular" theory would be nice if Killber B has not transformed his entire arm into hand/tentacle state. Gaara is using just partial transformations and his "full Shukaku form" is not a full transformation as he isn't mentioned to have a full control over a Tailed Beasts. He just creates a copy of Shukaku's body through transforming sand into physical form just like during partial transformation and then he falls asleep with the technique as when a host is sleeping, Shukaku gains control.--Elveonora (talk) 15:59, June 19, 2012 (UTC)

So their blood cloak could provide the organic material to produce the fur, horn and not their actual bodies except for the basic initial transformation, teeth lengthening, nail groeth, etc. As for Killer bee he is a master of tailed beast control...perhaps he's forming the beast's chakra into specific parts so it appears that an physical change is taking place.(UubPathnik (talk) 17:15, September 16, 2012 (UTC))

speculative
"Child affected by a tailed beast while in a womb" The majority takes it as a given that Naruto's face markings (those aren't whiskers, more like birth marks or something) but such thing was never ever hinted upon.

Same goes for Gaara, Gamabunta speculated that the eye lines are due to insomnia. Proven false, or at least not due to it alone as Gaara was born with them, and people took it as a proof of being physically affected or something. Gaara's father the 4th Kazekage had the very exact ones when using his KKG style, was he a Shukaku's host as well? Or don't tell me that he had modeled it like that.

There's too many unknown and no such thing was mentioned in the manga nor databook, unless I'm mistaken... thus a speculation/common assumption--Elveonora (talk) 11:44, August 25, 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think so. The markings on Naruto's face are definitely an influence of the Kurama, we have the Gold and Silver Brothers to bear witness to that. Gaara's case, however, does seem to be entirely different and the markings seem to be genetics, so that should be amended.--Cerez 365 ™Hyūga Symbol.svg(talk) 11:48, August 25, 2012 (UTC)
 * Waittt. I've become confused. When was it stated that Shukaku was sealed within Gaara before his birth? The conversation between the Fourth and Chiyo seems to contradict that.--Cerez 365 ™Hyūga Symbol.svg(talk) 11:55, August 25, 2012 (UTC)
 * Gaara stated it himself in the original Naruto series in this episode --Speysider Talk Page 12:00, August 25, 2012 (UTC)

We didn't see Kin&Gin's faces before being swallowed by Kurama.--Elveonora (talk) 12:07, August 25, 2012 (UTC)

Ah I found the bit about Gaara, which leads me to believe that Shukaku might have played a role in the permanence of the markings and not them being there themselves because the Fourth's is conditional. True we never saw Kinkaku nor Ginkaku's face prior to their being swallowed but you can't overlook the fact that the only concrete thing the three of them have in common is being influenced by Kurama.--Cerez 365 ™(talk) 12:16, August 25, 2012 (UTC)

And being somehow related to So6p ;) but it's not that, it's okay to have assumptions when they appear logical... just such thing wasn't stated nor even hinted upon by Kishi, so if we went all by our "logical assumptions" then we would have our own version of canon.

I didn't remember people even commenting on Naruto's whisker-like marks, with "oh, he must definitely be the jinchuriky of kyubi" or "he is weird, a child born with whiskers?" just nothing.--Elveonora (talk) 12:23, August 25, 2012 (UTC)

Sage of the Six Paths thing is still up in the air, there are people way more closely related to the Sage and they had no whisker-like markings. And facial markings aren't anything special in the Naruto-verse. There are people walking around with fangs, squares, swirls and curves (one cool Konoha nin has lines running all over her face) and I've yet to hear anyone go "oh he/she's an Inuzuka or Akimichi, look at his face".--Cerez 365 ™(talk) 12:44, August 25, 2012 (UTC)

The difference being those are tattoos/drawings, while Naruto's are a birth mark. Kin&Gin might had them since birth as well, Kishi didn't show their faces prior to the event to keep it ambiguous. We had another Kurama female pregnant host in the history, Mito... with her children unknown, but no mention or comparison about whisker markings ever given. So if Kishi bothers to one day reveal Mito and Hashirama's children, and they have fox whiskers... I will eat this. Now it's a baseless assumption and trying to apply genetics or what shit to naruto-verse. There's no indication of Naruto being affected by Kurama's chakra before birth... it's chakra is (or better say was and now it's all my little pony) poisonous, he would have died right away.--Elveonora (talk) 18:48, August 25, 2012 (UTC)

version 1?
When was the chakra cloak called version 1? (EASTFIRE)--217.164.174.138 (talk) 13:35, August 27, 2012 (UTC)

since that more advanced cloak is version 2, the standard is by logic version 1?--Elveonora (talk) 14:16, August 27, 2012 (UTC)

Yes and no, although it could mean that it is called version 1. it could also mean that it has a name and killer bee didnt bother mention it, so he simply called it the version 2 of a term that we dont know about. that and its never been called like that in the manga.

( Eastfire ) --2.51.227.138 (talk) 16:27, August 28, 2012 (UTC)

B calling it version 2 made the pages much easier to organise, since we would create a section for each tailed state, and then we saw two versions with the same number of tails. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 00:17, August 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * Technically we're not going off "nothing" I believe it was referenced during the fight between B and Kisame after Samehada had absorbed his chakra in Version 2.--Cerez 365 ™Hyūga Symbol.svg(talk) 00:48, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

No it was not mentioned in any chapter although I remember that it was called (chakra cloak ) or somthing like that but cant remember the chapter. ( Eastfire)--94.59.181.66 (talk) 13:11, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

Jiraiya referred to it as "demon fox cloak" to Kakashi in early part two. Removing the "demox fox" which applies only to Kurama leaves us only with cloak, which can apply to either form. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 23:53, August 29, 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply, yes I can see your view, but I think we have another name that is the ( Nine tails chakra mode )this could be the name of the cloak and the bijuu shaped cloak is the second version of it. I dont want to speculate here but wouldnt you agree? ( Eastfire)--217.164.172.63 (talk) 18:08, September 4, 2012 (UTC)

Well, if it was one me... I'd also call the Tailed Beast Mode just Nine-Tails Chakra Mide Version 2 --Elveonora (talk) 23:06, September 4, 2012 (UTC)

I also looked in the episode where hachibi speaks to naruto about the bijuu dama and he calls the cloak (bijuu chakra mode) (Eastfire)--94.59.181.121 (talk) 18:54, September 5, 2012 (UTC)

So?--

Anime has no bearing here...
 * Version 1- see-through shroud; was referenced by Sabu during the Kisame fight and used out of convenience here
 * Version 2- opaque shroud; called so directly
 * Nine-Tails Chakra Mode- Naruto uses Kurama's chakra sans Kurama (the latter part may no longer hold true)
 * Tailed Beast Mode- chapter title and if memory serves me correctly they've called it such in chapter. Here Naruto + Kurama are working together. So it wouldn't be called NTCM version 2, because it has a name.--Cerez 365 ™Hyūga Symbol.svg(talk) 20:17, September 7, 2012 (UTC)

Are you sure that sabu used this term ? (Eastfire)--2.51.237.195 (talk) 20:33, September 16, 2012 (UTC)

Menma
Menma must be mentioned somewhere in the article, mustn't he? In similar cases probably.

Satori
In the Similar cases section, shouldn't Muku and Satori be a similar case, since people are able to become the host of Satori and gain it's abilities by going inside the box? Jinchuriki are the host of their tailed beast and also gain their abilities.  DragonKnight99 the  12:11, November 20, 2012 (UTC)

Healing
I thought all Jinchuriki had increased healing while drawing on their tailed beast's chakra... Why does it state this is strictly naruto? Skarrj (talk) 05:31, November 24, 2012 (UTC)

Cause it's only ever been seen or said to be from the Kyuubi's chakra.98.26.240.254 (talk) 05:43, November 24, 2012 (UTC) Yhwach

Fukai's Jinchuuriki Transformation
As seen on the latest episode, Fukai can be seen transforming in Version 2 right? So are we suppose to create this page? Jean Gorby (talk) 12:22, June 20, 2013 (UTC) Jean Gorby Jean Gorby (talk) 12:22, June 20, 2013 (UTC)

Minato the perfect jinchuuriki
Ain't he one?
 * full control of his tailed beast's power
 * no hostility shown between the two; yup--Elveonora (talk) 12:26, September 8, 2013 (UTC)


 * So why not just add it? Saves the trouble of a discussion that's already going to have a foreseeable outcome, wouldn't you think? ~ Ten Tailed Fox Yamagakure Symbol.svg 15:50, September 8, 2013 (UTC)


 * So he's Killer B?--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 17:12, September 8, 2013 (UTC)


 * Apparently. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Yamagakure Symbol.svg 00:30, September 9, 2013 (UTC)

Is Obito a perfect jinchūriki?
Should we consider him one? He can fully manifest the God Tree form of the Ten-Tails and still retain full control of himself.JOA20 (talk) 20:15, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

Manga images
Ive said the same thing about the Biju, do the Jinchuriki really need manga and anime images in their infoboxes? I think all 6 of them pretty much are portrayed the same in both mediums. (Fu has slightly darker skin, but its not really much of a notable change, and Utakata seems to have slightly more narrow eyes in the manga, but that's really no excuse.) Previously some didnt have very good anime images (Han especially >_<), but now i think we have quite a few great shots.--RexGodwin (talk) 00:46, September 14, 2013 (UTC)

Shukaku's Jinchūrikis
In the article there are 4 Jinchūrikis mentioned for the Shukaku, and the reference for it is Chapter 261 page 5. I looked that up at manga panda & manga stream, and what was stated is "INCLUDING Gaara, in the history of the Sand,three Jinchūriki have appeared so far". So, What I understood is all of them together are 3 people, rather than being 3 Jinchūriki before Gaara because as you may see she said "INCLUDING GAARA" Therefore, I think the second unnamed Jinchūriki should be removed, no? Rex-05 (talk) 23:06, December 25, 2013 (UTC)rex
 * Someone made a mistake when adding that info earlier today. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 23:34, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

Pregnancy
OK, so the article says, "A full-term pregnancy for a female jinchūriki is about ten months.[22]" We're forgetting one thing. This is a Japanese manga. Pregnancies in Japan are usually measured in terms of lunar months. The normal pregnancy is traditionally considered to be TEN months because of this. We should at least clarify that or something because the article makes it seem like Jinchuriki have abnormal pregnancies. --Narutodude (talk) 20:30, January 25, 2014 (UTC)
 * Except if it weren't something unique to a pregnant jinchuuriki, he wouldn't have mentioned the jinchuuriki part at all and would have rather said: "A full-term pregnancy for a female is about ten months"--Elveonora (talk) 20:52, January 25, 2014 (UTC)