Talk:Sword of Totsuka

Kusanagi and Totsuka
Okay, once and for all, is the Totsuka a version of the Kusanagi or the opposite? Yatanogarasu 23:36, November 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * It's a Kusanagi sword not the opposite. Apparently it was a bad translation that said it was the opposite --Cerez365 (talk) 23:39, November 22, 2010 (UTC)

Name
Shouldn't we call this "Sword of Ten Hands Long" or "Totsuka no Tsurugi" instead? Like Decapitating Carving Knife or Samehada. Instead of a half translation, make it a full. Yatanogarasu 23:39, November 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * I strongly disagree. Not only is the name of the Totsuka no Tsurugi completely meaningless here, but translating it fully would also obscure the links it has with Japanese mythology. We might as well translate Amaterasu and Tsukuyomi. For that matter, we might as well translate Kusanagi. —ShounenSuki (talk 23:47, November 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * As for the 'no tsurugi' part, I'd rather not keep that Japanese. It only adds confusion, making the name unnecessarily long, and translating it actually adds to the name. It has meaning and is relevant, making it logical to translate. —ShounenSuki (talk 23:49, November 22, 2010 (UTC)

"Of?"
Should it be "Sword of Totsuka" or "Totsuka Sword?" I always thought it was the second one, but... 98.200.125.177 (talk) 22:33, November 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * Both are equally valid. ~SnapperTo 00:51, November 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe we should decide on a standard. You know, to make things consistent with Sword of Kusanagi and Yata Mirror. —ShounenSuki (talk 00:54, November 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * There are several similar cases, aren't there? The many Lands, Eye of the Moon, all of the jutsu. Everything with の, really. Since we favor literal translations, it doesn't make much sense to rearrange the Japanese and add "of" just to retain some artifact of の. ~SnapperTo 01:19, November 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, I'm not saying we have to go over each and every instance of の. It's quite simply bullshit to think it always literally translates to 'of'. It simply has a broader function than that.
 * What I meant was that with the 'legendary' tools like the Kusanagi-no-Tsurugi, the Totsuka-no-Tsurugi, and the Yata-no-Tsurugi, it would look nicer if we translated them in the same way. To give our English-speaking audience the same sense of consistency that the Japanese readers would feel when seeing those names. The situation as it is now would be akin to us translating Hi no Kuni as 'Land of Fire', but Mizu no Kuni as 'Water Country'. —ShounenSuki (talk 02:00, November 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * So are we going to change the name??--LeafShinobi (talk) 16:57, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

I'd be good with using the Japanese names. The Treasured Tools of the Sage of the Six Paths use their original names.--Cerez365™ 20:40, November 10, 2011 (UTC)

the sword user
hello14:56, December 24, 2010 (UTC)

finally there is someone put the totsuka sword article alone,anyway14:56, December 24, 2010 (UTC)14:56, December 24, 2010 (UTC)

i think we should write the user with something, like example: users:"itachi(with susanoo)14:56, December 24, 2010 (UTC)

like nagato's chibaku tensei(with the deva path)14:56, December 24, 2010 (UTC)~

i now will write it14:56, December 24, 2010 (UTC)14:56, December 24, 2010 (UTC)

THANKYOU14:56, December 24, 2010 (UTC)Small brother (talk) 14:56, December 24, 2010 (UTC)

Sasuke's Susanoo?
My friends and I have asked this question many times among ourselves, but why doesn't Sasuke, or his Susanoo, wield the Sword of Totsuka? I know that it's made up of chakra and it only exists in the user, but how did Itachi get it? Was there some kind of achievement/sacrifice that Itachi made that Sasuke didn't? And how did Zetsu and Orochimaru know about if it only existed in Itachi?

My viewpoint is that the Sword of Totsuka is trophy for an achievement or sacrifice made. If anyone thinks I'm wrong, voice your opinion freely. Thejluninja (talk) 19:00, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

I've been told that Itachi put the sword with his Susanoo, and he got the sword from somewhere else.Undominanthybrid (talk) 19:21, June 16, 2012 (UTC)

The Effects of Being Sealed?
Does anyone know what the effects are of being sealed? Itachi stated that it would trap the victim in an eternal genjutsu, but Nagato said that he would return to the afterlife. Does this cause death, or was Nagato just not sure what would really happen to him? The same thing confuses me about the third Hokage when he was sealed by the Death God. He said that he would go to the other world, but he should be sealed in the Death God's stomach instead. The idea of sealing people is really confusing to me. 67.84.95.51 (talk) 21:43, August 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Why do people take minor details like this so literally? It's the same thing with the Dead Demon Seal and Kushina saying she could be with Minato now. Apart from knowing that it seals the person's soul in a "genjutsu-like world of drunken dreams" we've got nothing.--Cerez365™ Hyūga Symbol.svg 21:48, August 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * So, do they pass onto the other world or no? I'm confused. 67.84.95.51 (talk) 01:47, August 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * He's sealed. Nothing really more to it.-- Hohenheim ☯ Talk ☯  20:14, November 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * His soul currently resides in the Sake Gourd carried by Itachi's Susanoo, experiencing an eternal genjutsu within. As for him claiming he'd meet Naruto again, it was figurative, just like Kushina saying she could be with Minato now and the Third Hokage telling Orochimaru that 'they would meet again in another world' even though both Hokages were permanently sealed in the Death God's belly.

which one is true??
last week, i checked this article, it was stated in the trivia section "The sword has been popularly mistranslated as a variant of kusanagi sword."

and now, it is stated "The sword has been popularly mistranslated as a "perfect counter to the Kusanagi".

which one is true???

sorry 4 my bad english... 182.11.164.163 (talk) 10:29, February 21, 2012 (UTC)KurangAsemRujak

"The sword has been popularly mistranslated as a "perfect counter to the Kusanagi" is the true one.--TricksterKing (talk) 11:05, February 21, 2012 (UTC)

Accessorizing Susanoo
I brought this up a while ago at Naruto Answers, and thought I'd get a few more opinions on the matter here. Basically, I believe that Itachi's acquisition of the items should be detailed with more ambiguity, as Orochimaru's search for the blade does not necessarily have to mean that Itachi had gone dungeon hoppin' to do the same; it's a commonly held assumption. There's nothing in the related articles from the 3rd Databook to suggest that they were anything but a part of Itachi's Susanoo, a part of his dōryoku.

Not that I'm suggesting that it actually say that they were inherently a part of Itachi's Susanoo. But I don't think it's entirely appropriate to say that Itachi somehow "found" them, either. —「SaiST」Mangekyō Sharingan Sasuke (Eternal).svg 16:29, April 4, 2014 (UTC)
 * If you can suggest a phrasing that doesn't go against anything we do know, be my guest. For me, the way Orochimaru said he looked for it, he spent quite a while looking for it, and doesn't really go with Itachi having awakened his Mangekyō around the time he left Konoha. A tale about the sword obviously existed independently from the Uchiha, otherwise Orochimaru would have known something, given how obsessed he was with the Uchiha and the Sharingan. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 20:56, April 4, 2014 (UTC)