Another topic involving Aizen's affairs

[Anypersonburnimagines]

I’ve been reviewing Aizen’s profile and noticed a few points that, in my view, deserve reevaluation. Either because they are poorly contextualized or simply don’t accurately reflect what’s shown in the work. Below, I explain each one with the respective justifications:

---

• Cosmic Awareness

Aizen can sense and tell what is going on in different dimensions

This point is based on the scene where, even while in the Seireitei, Aizen perceives the confrontation between Yhwach and Ichigo, which was taking place in the Soul King’s Palace — which, according to calculations, is about the same distance as between the Sun and the Earth. However, this distance has now been invalidated due to internal logic issues in the narrative itself.

Therefore, I propose removing this ability, at least until the issue is resolved.

---

• Kyōka Suigetsu Enhancement

Nowadays, the profile correctly acknowledges that KS was enhanced. But there is aspecific passage that, in my opinion, is unnecessary:

Even the immense precognitive powers of The Allmighty could not counter Kyoka Suigetsu's illusions, which were capable of affecting its vision of the future

This comment doesn’t add much. In fact, it reinforces an inflated understanding of the situation.

KS works by directly affecting the target’s senses, and that alone is enough to confuseany kind of clairvoyance or precognition — because these abilities still rely on sensory interpretation (sight, perception, pattern recognition) to function.

In Yhwach’s case, it’s not that KS “tricked” his precognition, but that it tricked the way heperceives the present. And, as Yhwach himself explains, the future he sees is not fixed but shaped by his perception of the current reality — the present.

So, if he is under an illusion and believes he is seeing Ichigo instead of Aizen, then all the future he perceives will be based on that false premise. After all, the mind interprets the future based on present information, and if that information is false, the reading of the future will also be false.

For this reason, this passage in the profile could be removed. It is redundant and ends up encouraging an unnecessarily exaggerated interpretation of the situation.

---

• Infinite Stamina

Infinite with the Hogyoku (The Hogyoku makes it such that his spiritual pressure will never deplete as his heart will not stop beating, meaning he can exert himself for a theoretically infinite amount of time)

This declaration no longer exist — it was completely removed in the more recent anime adaptation. Which may indicate a change of intention by the author — in other words, a retcon.

Taking this into account, the idea of “infinite stamina” based solely on this line is no longer strongly supported, and it may be time to reconsider including it in the profile.

---

• Kurohitsugi and Aizen’s Resistance

Here the issue is the use of Hadō #90 — Kurohitsugi as justification for certain resistances attributed to Aizen:

Space-Time Manipulation, Deconstruction & Gravity Manipulation (Atomic; Was able to withstandhis own Hado #90: Kurohitsugi)

But this is somewhat out of context. The Kurohitsugi only shows its full power when cast with the full incantation. That’s why, when Ichigo survives this Hadō, the justification for his resistance makes sense:

Space-Time Manipulation, Deconstruction & Gravity Manipulation (Atomic; Capable of withstanding the effects of Sosuke Aizen's Kurohitsugi with full incantation, which is stated to be able to warp space and time, and destroy the target on an atomic level)

— he endured a fully cast version of the technique.

However, in Aizen’s case (1:36), he used the technique without any incantation. In other words, we can't be certain that the version of Kurohitsugi Aizen used in TYBW would have the same destructive capacity as the version used against Ichigo, given that it was weaker since no incantation was recited.

And no, we also can't use the fact that Urahara was suprised (2:00) by the destructive capacity of a Hadō #90 cast without an incantation as definitive proof. By itself, this doesn't prove much — except that Aizen is indeed more powerful than before. Urahara’s surprise indicates an increase in raw power, but it's not sufficient evidence to equate this incomplete version of Kurohitsugi with it's fully incanted use.

Also, regarding Aizen’s statement about Kurohitsugi creating a fissure in the canopy (2:06), well, this does show that even without the incantation, Kurohitsugi still has severe gravitational effects — but that’s about it. This detail doesn't prove atomic-level destruction, nor does it confirm any space-time distortion equivalent to the fully incanted version used against Ichigo.

This context, at most, this would grant Aizen resistance to Gravity Manipulation. However, it doesn't make him resistant to the same effects that Kurohitsugi has when fully incanted.

Therefore, using this weaker version of Kurohitsugi as a basis to attribute resistance to effects such as atomic-level destruction doesn't seem correct. It appears inaccurateand should be removed.

---

• Agred:
• Disagree:
• Neutral:

 

[AyOgUyS]

not an expert on the verse but this is fine, I agree

 

[Arcker123]

This point is based on the scene where, even while in the Seireitei, Aizen perceives the confrontation between Yhwach and Ichigo, which was taking place in the Soul King’s Palace — which, according to calculations, is about the same distance as between the Sun and the Earth. However, this distance has now been invalidated due to internal logic issues in the narrative itself.

Therefore, I propose removing this ability, at least until the issue is resolved.

Aizen senses things from Muken, which is another dimension.

The ability still fits

KS works by directly affecting the target’s senses, and that alone is enough to confuseany kind of clairvoyance or precognition — because these abilities still rely on sensory interpretation (sight, perception, pattern recognition) to function.

A vision from the future is not directly being perceived by a person's physical senses. Its a mental image.

In Yhwach’s case, it’s not that KS “tricked” his precognition, but that it tricked the way heperceives the present. And, as Yhwach himself explains, the future he sees is not fixed but shaped by his perception of the current reality — the present.

That is not saying what you're claiming it does. He's saying he can see everything from now to the future, not that these futures are shaped by his perception of the future. These are two wildly different assertions that don't entail each other.

So, if he is under an illusion and believes he is seeing Ichigo instead of Aizen, then all the future he perceives will be based on that false premise.

This is entirely baseless. A precognitive would see the actual future. The reason Aizen's illusions worked is because (like he stated) now has the ability to directly influence someones ability to know the future, which is distinct from their actual five senses.

For this reason, this passage in the profile could be removed. It is redundant and ends up encouraging an unnecessarily exaggerated interpretation of the situation.

It is not redundant. Its an entirely new function of the ability that directly allows him to counter a common ability.

• Kurohitsugi and Aizen’s Resistance

Here the issue is the use of Hadō #90 — Kurohitsugi as justification for certain resistances attributed to Aizen:


But this is somewhat out of context. The Kurohitsugi only shows its full power when cast with the full incantation. That’s why, when Ichigo survives this Hadō, the justification for his resistance makes sense:


— he endured a fully cast version of the technique.

However, in Aizen’s case (1:36), he used the technique without any incantation. In other words, we can't be certain that the version of Kurohitsugi Aizen used in TYBW would have the same destructive capacity as the version used against Ichigo, given that it was weaker since no incantation was recited.

And no, we also can't use the fact that Urahara was suprised (2:00) by the destructive capacity of a Hadō #90 cast without an incantation as definitive proof. By itself, this doesn't prove much — except that Aizen is indeed more powerful than before. Urahara’s surprise indicates an increase in raw power, but it's not sufficient evidence to equate this incomplete version of Kurohitsugi with it's fully incanted use.

Also, regarding Aizen’s statement about Kurohitsugi creating a fissure in the canopy (2:06), well, this does show that even without the incantation, Kurohitsugi still has severe gravitational effects — but that’s about it. This detail doesn't prove atomic-level destruction, nor does it confirm any space-time distortion equivalent to the fully incanted version used against Ichigo.

This context, at most, this would grant Aizen resistance to Gravity Manipulation. However, it doesn't make him resistant to the same effects that Kurohitsugi has when fully incanted.

Therefore, using this weaker version of Kurohitsugi as a basis to attribute resistance to effects such as atomic-level destruction doesn't seem correct. It appears inaccurateand should be removed.

Aizen is stronger now than he was in Deicide. Its consistent for TYBW's chantless Kido to be > Deicides chanted Kido. In fact, this feat in particular led knowledgeable characters to say Muken Aizen > Deicide. There is more than enough to scale this resistance.

Muken Aizen's Kido is also shown to have the same atomization effect with the no debris stuff and the fissure proving spatial warping.

• Infinite Stamina

This declaration no longer exist — it was completely removed in the more recent anime adaptation. Which may indicate a change of intention by the author — in other words, a retcon.

Taking this into account, the idea of “infinite stamina” based solely on this line is no longer strongly supported, and it may be time to reconsider including it in the profile.

The manga is secondary canon. It can still be used.

 

[ItsMeat]

Oh, boy, here we go:

For interdimensional range, the Reiokyu IS in another dimension and that's the whole point of Oken.

For Kyōka enhancement part, again, you are wrong. I don’t think you understand The Almighty properly. Yhwach sees every possible future as mere grains of sand, "from high above". In fact, it can even foresee the futures resulted from different pasts. I think you don't understand just how great The Almighty's perception is. In the past, I think we even had proposals for higher dimensional perception manipulation for Kyōka due to this feat. In fact, here is a reddit post about it.

Then, the section is also important to show he can counter abilities such as precognition thanks to his illusions.


For the kurohitsugi part, using kidos without their chant significantly weakens the spell, but it doesn't change its function or anything else at all. And we know for a fact that this Aizen is stronger than his previous forms, meaning his spells should also be significantly stronger. You say it didn't show the same space-time distorsion and deconstruction powers as his 4th fusion's full chant kurohitsugi, but mind showing that kurohitsugi doing anything more? And the narrative purpose of this feat and of the urahara statement IS to show that Aizen became even stronger.

For the infinite stamina part, the manga is still canon

 

[Anypersonburnimagines]

Aizen senses things from Muken, which is another dimension.
The ability still fits

Does the wiki accept Muken as its own dimension outside of the Soul Society?

A vision from the future is not directly being perceived by a person's physical senses. Its a mental image.

Even if the vision of the future is a mental image rather than a direct sensory stimulus, the mind that interprets that image still relies on sensory and cognitive references constructed from the perception of the present.

That is not saying what you're claiming it does. He's saying he can see everything from now to the future, not that these futures are shaped by his perception of the future. These are two wildly different assertions that don't entail each other.

One thing doesn't exclude the other.

Yhwach stating that he can see “everything from the present to the future” describes the temporal scope of the ability, not that this vision is independent from perceived reality. The very way The Almighty functions makes it clear that the future he observes derives from causal chains that begin in the present. He does not observe an “abstract future,” isolated from the now — he observes possible futures based on the current state of the world.

And this is exactly where Kyōka Suigetsu comes into play. There is no need to claim that futures are “shaped by the perception of the future”. The point is different: they are shaped by the perception of the present, because the present defines which agents exist, who is where, and which actions are currently unfolding. If this foundation is distorted, the futures derived from it will be distorted as well.

This is entirely baseless. A precognitive would see the actual future. The reason Aizen's illusions worked is because (like he stated) now has the ability to directly influence someones ability to know the future, which is distinct from their actual five senses.

No. In Bleach, there is no single “real” future. Yhwach himself makes it clear that the future consists of possibilities that unfold from the current state of the world. The Almighty allows him to see and intervene in these possible futures, but they do not exist in isolation or as predetermined outcomes independent of the present.

Therefore, saying that “a precognitive would see the real future” doesn't apply here. Yhwach does not observe an absolute future; he observes causal future branches. And causal chains always originate from the present.

It is not redundant. Its an entirely new function of the ability that directly allows him to counter a common ability.

...

Aizen is stronger now than he was in Deicide. Its consistent for TYBW's chantless Kido to be > Deicides chanted Kido. In fact, this feat in particular led knowledgeable characters to say Muken Aizen > Deicide. There is more than enough to scale this resistance.

It is perfectly reasonable to say that Aizen in Muken is stronger than before — this is suggested and demonstrated by the narrative. However, the problem is the logical leap that follows: assuming that, therefore, an unincanted Kidō from TYBW Aizen is automatically superior and at the same time has the same effects as a fully incanted Kidō is highly speculative. The work never states that such a thing is possible.

Muken Aizen's Kido is also shown to have the same atomization effect with the no debris stuff and the fissure proving spatial warping.

Where? Could you show the scan of this?

The manga is secondary canon. It can still be used.

This has already been discussed. The animated version of TYBW takes precedence over the manga. The manga, as secondary canon, is only usable in moments that do not contradict the TYBW anime. That is why minute details of Gremmy’s Galaxy Room are currently ignored in his scaling.

 

[Arcker123]

Does the wiki accept Muken as its own dimension outside of the Soul Society?

Yes

And this is exactly where Kyōka Suigetsu comes into play. There is no need to claim that futures are “shaped by the perception of the future”. The point is different: they are shaped by the perception of the present, because the present defines which agents exist, who is where, and which actions are currently unfolding. If this foundation is distorted, the futures derived from it will be distorted as well.

This is dumb.

The futures change by what happens, not the perception of it. If this were true, then Yhwach wouldn't be able to see futures of stuff he didn't see because he didn't perceive.

Therefore, saying that “a precognitive would see the real future” doesn't apply here. Yhwach does not observe an absolute future

Nobody made this claim.

Real future ≠ only future. A "possible future" is just a real way the world could be in the future.

And causal chains always originate from the present

Sure. This doesn't help you though.

It is perfectly reasonable to say that Aizen in Muken is stronger than before — this is suggested and demonstrated by the narrative. However, the problem is the logical leap that follows: assuming that, therefore, an unincanted Kidō from TYBW Aizen is automatically superior

Nobody made this claim. Nobody said "in virtue of the fact Aizen is stronger, his kido has the same effects." It was just to show why it would be possible for Aizen's Kurohitsugi in the blood war to be stronger. Other arguments were presented to show why this was actually the case. As you mentioned, Muken Aizen was demonstrated to be above Deicide Aizen. How Kubo did that was by just showing and stating Current Aizen's Kurohitsugi was stronger now than it was in the past. Not just comparing overall power, but using the fact Muken Aizen's Kurohitsugi was superior to conclude Aizen overall was superior.

and at the same time has the same effects as a fully incanted Kidō is highly speculative. The work never states that such a thing is possible.

Yamamoto's chantless Itto Kaso was stated to be above several of Azashiro's Chanted Itto Kaso, so you're just wrong here. Its perfectly possible for a chantless Kido from a stronger character to be above even multiple chantless Kido from a weaker one.

Of course they have the same effect... its the same ability. The severity of which is dependent on chant and caster power.

Where? Could you show the scan of this?

This has already been discussed. The animated version of TYBW takes precedence over the manga. The manga, as secondary canon, is only usable in moments that do not contradict the TYBW anime. That is why minute details of Gremmy’s Galaxy Room are currently ignored in his scaling.

There isn't a contradiction. An omission due to time constraints isn't Kubo saying X now isn't true. It just couldn't be focused on. The anime's new ideas are simply higher priority to show (obviously) than these seemingly throw away lines that only matter to scalers.

 

[Anypersonburnimagines]

Yes

Got it.

This is dumb.

The futures change by what happens, not the perception of it. If this were true, then Yhwach wouldn't be able to see futures of stuff he didn't see because he didn't perceive.

You didn’t get it. I’m not saying that the future changes according to perception — it’s quite clear that the future changes according to events. However, the way future possibilities are interpreted depends on how the present is perceived from the observer’s perspective.

Nobody made this claim.

Real future ≠ only future. A "possible future" is just a real way the world could be in the future.

The central point is that each future Yhwach sees is always conditioned by the present.

Each “possible future” is a branch of causal events originating from the current state of the world. In other words, although these possibilities are real, none of them exist in isolation or as a predetermined line independent of the present.

This is precisely why illusions like Aizen’s work: they alter the observer’s perception of the present, and the interpreted futures derived from that perception are also affected.

Sure. This doesn't help you though.

Actually, it does help, because it defines the mechanism by which Kyōka Suigetsu can affect Yhwach. It’s not necessary to “trick the future” directly; it’s enough to distort his perception of the present, so any error in perceiving the present (like believing Aizen is Ichigo) would interfere with his perception of what is real or not.

As you mentioned, Muken Aizen was demonstrated to be above Deicide Aizen. How Kubo did that was by just showing and stating Current Aizen's Kurohitsugi was stronger now than it was in the past.

Actually, no. As far as I know, this was never suggested. What the work shows is that even without the incantation, Aizen’s Kurohitsugi was powerful enough to cause all that damage — not that this unincanted version had surpassed the version with the incantation.

Yamamoto's chantless Itto Kaso was stated to be above several of Azashiro's Chanted Itto Kaso, so you're just wrong here. Its perfectly possible for a chantless Kido from a stronger character to be above even multiple chantless Kido from a weaker one.

Of course they have the same effect... its the same ability. The severity of which is dependent on chant and caster power.

Now with this context given, yes, it’s plausible. I can agree.

There isn't a contradiction. An omission due to time constraints isn't Kubo saying X now isn't true. It just couldn't be focused on. The anime's new ideas are simply higher priority to show (obviously) than these seemingly throw away lines that only matter to scalers.

I don’t see how this couldn’t be considered a contradiction. The statement was completely removed in the anime adaptation, which suggests that the author or production decided not to include it — this is the very definition of a retcon. The simple claim that “there wasn’t enough time due to time constraints” is not enough to guarantee that such content is still valid to use as a reference.

If it were just a minor omission, we would expect less important details to be discarded while elements crucial to the narrative of the prisoners remained.

If the wiki rejected scaling Gremmy to 3-C simply because minute details of his imagination in the manga were completely ignored in the anime adaptation, then what makes this case actually different?

 

[Excellence616]

It is perfectly reasonable to say that Aizen in Muken is stronger than before — this is suggested and demonstrated by the narrative. However, the problem is the logical leap that follows: assuming that, therefore, an unincanted Kidō from TYBW Aizen is automatically superior and at the same time has the same effects as a fully incanted Kidō is highly speculative. The work never states that such a thing is possible.

With what you said, if Yamamoto cast a Hado #90 with incantation > Fourth Fusion Aizen without incantation?

 

[Sigurd_Snake_in_The_Eye]

That is regarded as an irregular galaxy therefore not 3-C, this is the main reason since 2018 before the anime even existed.

 

[Arcker123]

You didn’t get it. I’m not saying that the future changes according to perception — it’s quite clear that the future changes according to events. However, the way future possibilities are interpreted depends on how the present is perceived from the observer’s perspective.

The reductio still holds. His interpretation being dependent on his perception means he couldn't see things he didn't perceive. Which is evidently not true.

Theres also just no evidence of this interpretation being true anyway.

The central point is that each future Yhwach sees is always conditioned by the present.

You have no evidence of this, and counterveiling evidence of Yhwach being able to see timeline distortions like Tsukishima creating a new past for Ichigo's Bankai directly debunks this.

Each “possible future” is a branch of causal events originating from the current state of the world. In other words, although these possibilities are real, none of them exist in isolation or as a predetermined line independent of the present.

This is precisely why illusions like Aizen’s work: they alter the observer’s perception of the present, and the interpreted futures derived from that perception are also affected.

This doesn't follow. "All futures follow from the present" to "the observers interpretation being altered means his visions would be altered" is a flat non sequitur. The first fact doesn't even entail that the observer’s present perception is even relevant to his sight of the future.

Actually, it does help, because it defines the mechanism by which Kyōka Suigetsu can affect Yhwach. It’s not necessary to “trick the future” directly;

No one's saying Aizen can affect the future. Just what a precognitive sees when they try to see the future (which its stated he did btw).

it’s enough to distort his perception of the present, so any error in perceiving the present (like believing Aizen is Ichigo) would interfere with his perception of what is real or not

This doesn't follow.

Actually, no. As far as I know, this was never suggested. What the work shows is that even without the incantation, Aizen’s Kurohitsugi was powerful enough to cause all that damage — not that this unincanted version had surpassed the version with the incantation.

Aizen's Unchanted Kurohitsugi has the same effect as his previous Chanted one, which leads everyone to proclaims he got stronger.

That is the suggestion.

The fact Aizen's kido he tanked demonstrably had the atomization warrants the resistance anyway, regardless of this discussion of scaling it to Deicide.

don’t see how this couldn’t be considered a contradiction. The statement was completely removed in the anime adaptation, which suggests that the author or production decided not to include it

No shit.

this is the very definition of a retcon.

No its not. You have to prove the positive claim of showing how the rule is contradicted. That is what a recon is, a contradiction, not omission. You cannot meet this burden.

Kubo very recently came out to say all Muken prisoners are immortal (which was the very statement cut from the manga) in klub outside. The Manga statement is very clearly still canon. These kinds of minor discrepancies are the very reason the Manga is a secondary canon to begin with. The anime can't include everything if it needs time for extra content. That doesn't mean everything that was cut isn't canon.

If it were just a minor omission, we would expect less important details to be discarded while elements crucial to the narrative of the prisoners remained.

You're wrong here. Kubo still very much refers to the prisoners as immortal. Your expectations of what is or is not important for Kubo don't matter and are not reliable.

If the wiki rejected scaling Gremmy to 3-C simply because minute details of his imagination in the manga were completely ignored in the anime adaptation, then what makes this case actually different?

1. You're wrong here. They were rejected not because the manga can't be used or was contradicted, but due to how we classified the depiction in the manga.

2. Kubo explicitly said the detail is canon in Klub Outside, Q&A 852

 

[Saqphire]

Disagree with all FRA. OP I will re-iterate what the Bleach canonicity page on this wiki is saying:

• In light of the comprehensive nature of the anime adaptation, content presented in the anime takes precedence over the original manga, given Kubo's involvement and the potential for content enhancement.
  • In the event that significant changes, including feats, statements, scaling, or abilities, are introduced in the anime that diverge from the manga, the anime version will be considered the improved and authoritative iteration. Consequently, any conflicting or divergent content from the manga will be superseded by the anime's portrayal.

Something taking precedence =/= omitted objects are removed from indexing. A contradiction simply means that two opposites cannot both be true. An omission is simply leaving something out; and leaving something out in one interpretation doesn't necessarily mean the left out object is no longer true in that interpretation. It is not contradictory for Aizen's Hogyoku to grant him infinite stamina, thus it is compatible.

For you to assert that an omission means it's a contradiction, you need to supplement that with further evidence. And saying "Oh Kubo may have had a change of intent" isn't evidence, that is headcanon.

 

[Anypersonburnimagines]

The reductio still holds. His interpretation being dependent on his perception means he couldn't see things he didn't perceive. Which is evidently not true.

This is a false dilemma. At no point am I claiming that Yhwach can only see what he directly perceives. The point is different: there is a fundamental distinction between access to information and the interpretation of that information.

Yhwach can, indeed, see events he has not perceived sensorially. Even so, the causal meaning he assigns to specific events is constructed is based on what he believes (present) to be real.

This doesn't reduce or limit the scope of The Almighty. The ability continues to function at full capacity. What is being explained is simply the cognitive process by which future information is organized and interpreted.

You have no evidence of this, and counterveiling evidence of Yhwach being able to see timeline distortions like Tsukishima creating a new past for Ichigo's Bankai directly debunks this.

This doesn't contradict the thesis that futures are causal branches derived from the present — in fact, it reinforces it. Tsukishima already existed in the present, his power was already available, and the possibility of his intervention was already part of the current state of the world. Therefore, that future outcome already constituted a valid causal line and was, accordingly, visible to The Almighty.

This doesn't follow. "All futures follow from the present" to "the observers interpretation being altered means his visions would be altered" is a flat non sequitur. The first fact doesn't even entail that the observer’s present perception is even relevant to his sight of the future.

There is no logical inconsistency between stating that all futures stem from the present and asserting that Yhwach’s interpretation of those futures depends on how he perceives the present. The first statement addresses the structure of the futures; the second concerns the epistemological process of interpreting that information. Perceptual distortions do not alter the futures themselves, but they do affect how those futures are understood in the present and acted upon by the observer.

No one's saying Aizen can affect the future. Just what a precognitive sees when they try to see the future (which its stated he did btw).

You are confirming my argument. The future itself is not altered; what is altered is Yhwach’s perception of the future — and that perception occurs in the present, not in the future.

This doesn't follow.

...

Aizen's Unchanted Kurohitsugi has the same effect as his previous Chanted one, which leads everyone to proclaims he got stronger.

That is the suggestion.

The fact Aizen's kido he tanked demonstrably had the atomization warrants the resistance anyway, regardless of this discussion of scaling it to Deicide.

No. The point was that even without the incantation, Aizen’s Kurohitsugi was still powerful enough to cause all that destruction — simply that. What you’re suggesting wasn’t implied by anyone; it’s merely your impression. But anyway, I’ve already agreed with the context you provided, so it kind of doesn’t matter anymore.

No its not. You have to prove the positive claim of showing how the rule is contradicted. That is what a recon is, a contradiction, not omission. You cannot meet this burden.

But that’s precisely why the term “retcon” applies: the original statement no longer exists in the current narrative. Even if there is no explicit contradiction with other events, the absence of a previously present statement changes how the character or ability should be interpreted, and that is exactly the effect of a retcon.

The burden of proving a contradiction is not necessary to recognize that a narrative change, removing a previously established element, alters the validity of that information as a reference.

Kubo very recently came out to say all Muken prisoners are immortal (which was the very statement cut from the manga) in klub outside. The Manga statement is very clearly still canon. These kinds of minor discrepancies are the very reason the Manga is a secondary canon to begin with. The anime can't include everything if it needs time for extra content. That doesn't mean everything that was cut isn't canon.

This isn’t just about the fact that the prisoners are immortal — that’s not the main point. What I’m highlighting is Mayuri’s statement in the manga, which says that the spiritual pressure of each Shinigami is eternal as long as their heart keeps beating, and that it’s impossible to interrupt this flow without stopping their heart.

This context, as presented in the manga, provides the basis for Aizen’s infinite resistance. However, in the anime adaptation, this context was completely ignored, which changes how things will be interpreted.

You're wrong here. Kubo still very much refers to the prisoners as immortal. Your expectations of what is or is not important for Kubo don't matter and are not reliable.

1. You're wrong here. They were rejected not because the manga can't be used or was contradicted, but due to how we classified the depiction in the manga.

2. Kubo explicitly said the detail is canon in Klub Outside, Q&A 852

It’s not about their immortality that I’m talking about.

 

[Anypersonburnimagines]

For you to assert that an omission means it's a contradiction, you need to supplement that with further evidence. And saying "Oh Kubo may have had a change of intent" isn't evidence, that is headcanon.

The central point is that, without concrete evidence that the Hōgyoku context was merely omitted and not discarded, any claim to that effect is just as speculative as my interpretation that it was removed. Both readings are mutually plausible, but the simplest and safest interpretation, based on the material currently presented in the anime, is to assume that the context no longer exists in the current narrative.

 

[Saqphire]

...but the simplest and safest interpretation, based on the material currently presented in the anime, is to assume that the context no longer exists in the current narrative.

That is not the simplest nor is it the safest interpretation; you're introducing an extra factor as to why the omission even took place which requires extra substantiation.

What we are saying from what was agreed upon when Arc7 made the anime thread in the first place is that the manga is not to be discarded as that is still Kubo material, but rather taking a step back as Kubo's true vision is what is being shown in the anime now.

That doesn't mean what he did show in the manga isn't apart of that vision anymore, especially when it's directly stated that they don't want to stray from the manga as much as possible. In fact, this is said multiple times by the creative directors, so the manga is still relevant to the series and as such, it should not be discarded. In fact, discarding manga feats and statements is directly going against their intent and what we are establishing; if you wanna remove the manga's feats you need a CRT establishing this.

 

[SacredDao]

Disagree FRA. and as saqphire said Omission ≠ Contradiction. It's on Op to provide that extra evidence for contradiction.

 

[Anypersonburnimagines]

...

The problem with your argument is that it treats “keeping the manga relevant” and “keeping every specific statement from the manga automatically valid” as if they were the same thing — they are not.

Agreeing that the manga shouldn't be discarded as a whole doesn't imply that every specific detail that was consciously removed in the most recent adaptation remains canonical by default. These are two different claims, with different standards of proof.

You say that my reading “introduces an extra factor” to explain the omission. But that isn't true. I'm not explaining why the omission occurred; I'm simply pointing out the consequence of that omission:

The context simply no longer exists in the current version.

The one introducing an extra factor here is precisely the opposite reading — yours — which requires the additional assumptions that:

• the statement was omitted without any loss of validity,
• the author still endorses that exact specific context, and
• the anime’s silence should be interpreted as tacit agreement.

Regarding the intention to ‘not stray from the manga as much as possible’. this establishes a general guideline, not an absolute rule of literal preservation. The very existence of selective cuts, restructurings, and reformulations in the anime proves that ‘not straying’ ≠ ‘fully replicating.’ Therefore, each cut must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, based on its interpretive impact.

Saying that “a revision thread is required to remove manga feats” would only make sense if I were proposing an active exclusion — but I'm not. I'm simply refusing to import a context that doesn't exist in the current material, without explicit confirmation that it still applies.

Without positive evidence that the context remains valid, treating it as nonexistent in the anime is not speculation; it is a conservative interpretation.

 

[Saqphire]

The problem with your argument is that it treats “keeping the manga relevant” and “keeping every specific statement from the manga automatically valid” as if they were the same thing — they are not.

Brother who is saying I am "keeping every specific statement from the manga as valid" ? I am saying statements that aren't contradictory are valid because the manga is supplementary to the anime. Supplementary is defined as

added to something else in order to improve it or complete it

If the anime had Aizen's statement about the Hogyoku, the manga wouldn't be supplementary because it isn't adding anything.

Agreeing that the manga shouldn't be discarded as a whole doesn't imply that every specific detail that was consciously removed in the most recent adaptation remains canonical by default.

This is what is currently accepted on the wiki for a very good reason; both materia are made from Kubo that tells the same narrative, thus both are primary canon; the anime is just taking precedence over the manga.

You say that my reading “introduces an extra factor” to explain the omission. But that isn't true. I'm not explaining why the omission occurred

Yes you are???? You literally said this:

Which may indicate a change of intention by the author — in other words, a retcon.

Which is an explanation as to why the omission occured, which is what I am asking you to substantiate.

The one introducing an extra factor here is precisely the opposite reading — yours — which requires the additional assumptions that:

• the statement was omitted without any loss of validity,
• the author still endorses that exact specific context, and
• the anime’s silence should be interpreted as tacit agreement.

The definition of precedence says:

the order of importance given to people in particular societies, groups, or organizations

The manga and the anime has an order of importance when it comes to canonicity as accepted in Arc7's thread, meaning the manga isn't excluded from the order of precedence. Thus manga statements and feats are to be taken as less important than the anime, but never not important. You are positing the latter, which requires you to make a CRT on it.

Regarding the intention to ‘not stray from the manga as much as possible’. this establishes a general guideline, not an absolute rule of literal preservation. The very existence of selective cuts, restructurings, and reformulations in the anime proves that ‘not straying’ ≠ ‘fully replicating.’ Therefore, each cut must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, based on its interpretive impact.

We already do this, we consider contradictory moments in the manga to be dismissed (e.g. Squad Zero getting off screened without using Bankai yet Senjumaru is using Bankai in the anime). We however, don't consider omissions as contradictions.

Saying that “a revision thread is required to remove manga feats” would only make sense if I were proposing an active exclusion — but I'm not. I'm simply refusing to import a context that doesn't exist in the current material, without explicit confirmation that it still applies.

Except it is currently accepted as a valid statement so it is currently imported as a canonical media. You are currently proposing an exclusion.

Without positive evidence that the context remains valid, treating it as nonexistent in the anime is not speculation; it is a conservative interpretation.

Your "conservative" interpretation is baseless headcanon as I posited earlier, point barre bruh.

Lastly, is this AI??? The wording and the structure is identical to ChatGPT lmfaoooo

 

[Anypersonburnimagines]

Brother who is saying I am "keeping every specific statement from the manga as valid" ? I am saying statements that aren't contradictory are valid because the manga is supplementary to the anime. Supplementary is defined as

This is what is currently accepted on the wiki for a very good reason; both materia are made from Kubo that tells the same narrative, thus both are primary canon; the anime is just taking precedence over the manga.

Except when the case is that such context was consciously removed in the anime adaptation. What I’m saying is that we can’t just assume it remains valid simply because the context still exists in the manga.

Yes you are???? You literally said this:

You’re mixing two things. When I said that, I wasn’t stating as a fact that there was a change of intention; I was interpreting it as a possibility and going straight to the consequence of the omission.

The definition of precedence says:

The manga and the anime has an order of importance when it comes to canonicity as accepted in Arc7's thread, meaning the manga isn't excluded from the order of precedence. Thus manga statements and feats are to be taken as less important than the anime, but never not important. You are positing the latter, which requires you to make a CRT on it.

The problem here is that you are confusing relative importance with automatic validity. Let's just agree to disagree.

We already do this, we consider contradictory moments in the manga to be dismissed (e.g. Squad Zero getting off screened without using Bankai yet Senjumaru is using Bankai in the anime). We however, don't consider omissions as contradictions.

I'm not saying that every omission is a contradiction; what I'm saying is that when a specific context with some narrative significance is removed, we can't simply assume it remains valid when we have no concrete evidence of the author's intent in removing it.

Except it is currently accepted as a valid statement so it is currently imported as a canonical media. You are currently proposing an exclusion.

No, I’m not proposing an exclusion. I’m merely arguing that, in the absence of explicit confirmation that the context still applies in the current material, we can’t automatically treat it as valid.

Your "conservative" interpretation is baseless headcanon as I posited earlier, point barre bruh.

It’s not speculation; It’s a cautious approach. When an important context is explicitly removed in the most recent version, the safest and most neutral position is not to automatically assume it remains valid — until there is positive confirmation.

Lastly, is this AI??? The wording and the structure is identical to ChatGPT lmfaoooo

It’s not. Everything I’ve written so far is based on my own reasoning, except that I use Grok to translate it and improve the didactics, given that English isn’t my strongest point.

 

[Anypersonburnimagines]

bump