Board Thread:Theories and Speculation/@comment-36512555-20200302063012/@comment-34656247-20200313014652

FlatZone wrote: @Jason they won't listen because they don't care, they just don't want the SoT being able to seal something like the Juubi lmao Lmao and now they're attacking the Yata Mirrior

Squinty97 wrote: You kept trying to get me to admit I was wrong about something I never even claimed. Worse still, you're belittling on the basis that I have no proof, despite literally no sides having proof. What's the deal here lol, I still haven't been able to figure out what this tangent has been about.

Well yeah we don't just go by description though. Otherwise, nothing can penetrate Gaara's defense, Chidori can pierce literally anything, Amaterasu is as hot as the sun, Susanoo is unbreachable since it's the ultimate defense, Hiruzen is above every Hokage, etc.

The SoT can seal targets, but claiming it can seal such a large amount of chakra like the Juubi, which not even a perfect Sage could sense the limit to, is speculation and only that. And I've told you why I thought it makes sense for it to have a limit, because it's literally a sealing weapon and we have precedent about sealing method limits.

The one-sentence description never mentioned any weakness to the technique, but we know they exists by Itachi's own words about jutsu in general. So just because the description doesn't mention limits, it's not any sort of evidence to say that those limits don't exist. I really think you're saying it can't seal the juubi because we've never seen it do so. Boruto never fought Orochimaru so we don't know if Orochimaru can beat him. Why does it need to have a weakness or limit? it's a spiritual weapon, it's not bound by the same logic as other things. I know there exists nonsensical statement in the naruto franchise, but using common sense we can spot those out, Hiruzen is the strongest Hokage, based on showings ,that was contradicted. The blade can seal whatever it pierces, was that contradicted in any way? did the juubi demonstrate anything that can contradict that statement? also can you site the precedent you're talking about, if it's something we've not gone over already.