Shibai Otsutsuki Universal+ Removel

[HelloThere1089]

Not that it is important, but mentioning "thousands" doesn't really give a cap. It's at bare minimum 2000 years. However at the upper end it can be anything really. Even 13.8 billion years can logically be written in thousands of years, so it shouldn't be used as a cap. We do the same thing with multipliers. Also the points Net mentioned above.

Moving on to the point about COAT, most of its description is talking about what it "can" do, and not what it has done. Just because it can create anything from nothing, doesn't mean that the universe was created using it. The only statement that gives that gist is a hype statement that is prevalent in databooks. Momoshiki on the other hand is pretty descriptive on what actually has happened, which is supported by the databooks as well. So that one is inconsequential as well.

There also seems to be talk about all Otsutsuki gods being on the same level or scaling to each other etc, most of it was already covered in the last CRT, but the gist imo is:
1. God created the world or brought about Genesis with a "capital G". Which is the creation of the universe that the Otsutsuki god is scaling to. And he did it via Omnipotence.
2. Otsutsuki aim to become God by ascension.
3. Only a omnipotent and omniscient being can fully utilize Omnipotence the ability.
4. Shibai accomplished that goal and hence should be able to do what Gods can.

 

[Godernet]

Warning to anyone dropping comments attacking KT or any other participant…

Knock it off

Unnecessary bickering unrelated to the CRT is getting deleted.

Now let’s stay on topic from here on, thank you.

 

[KingTempest]

Ngl you're being biased and illogical. Weird coming from a staff member. But then again, you're a one piece fan. Not trying to be rude but not surprised considering your history. How can a staff member not even give explanations on why they agree/disagree over something as important as this and despite acknowledging the OP provided close to know evidences initially, still went ahead to make a conclusion? @Godernet made his points as a staff and here you are being slick. Like how are we supposed to take a staff like this seriously?

All due respect stop talking to me bro

 

[Tdjwo]

All due respect stop talking to me bro

I dont remember anywhere on this site where its against the rules to confront a staff not doing his job properly. If I feel like you aren't doing your job properly I can call you out whenever I want as long as I'm not cursing or insulting you. Or maybe I'm missing something. Someone enlighten me.

 

[Shadow7001]

Peerless means

1. unequalled; unrivalled.

This is an adjective that used to describe a particular being or object in a comparative manner. Now who was Momoshiki comparing the oats gods to? He was comparing them to everything beneath them I.e living beings and normal oats, this route of reasoning makes sense as there is no other being like oats gods they are completely unique in their physiology and existence compared to all other living beings and unrivaled in strength and intelligence. Hence a peerless existence. If it was compared to other gods than only a singular oats god would exist but here there are multiple which is contradictory to the word if used the way you are making out it to be.

I guess my argument here is that Momoshiki was potentially talking about the Creator Otsutsuki God here when he refers to the peerless, one-of-a-kind existence here, not just the state of being as a Otsutsuki God but I guess the latter also has merit. That's why later I'm confused about why we're equating a being who is said to be peerless and unique and saying that any Otsutsuki God can do what whatever he did (which would be rather un-unique of him obviously).

As stated before the ability to wield omnipotence is reserved for oats gods alone because of their very nature. It’s an ability that can only be used to its fullest extent by a god alone or else Eida would have full control over it. And the concept of mastery is not a factor for oats as their entire existence is based on the notation of advancement without training. Moreover only a oats god has access to omnipotence you can’t have access to it if your not one. There is also no evidence of higherarcy in the oats godhood so the idea that one can create universe and another one can’t due some assumptive reasoning is not it.

This section is a bit incoherent IMO. So, in one instance you say that full control over Omnipotence is inherent to the existence of a God, and that other beings such as Eida cannot possess full control over it. In the next section you claim that ONLY God can have access to it at all and that to not be a God is to not have access to it. So, which is it? Eida clearly has it if a bit limited in scope and potency. Also, the point about no hierarchy seems like a weird conjecture made up to argue the universal part. I can accept that if there were some implication of that in the source material but not only do I not find anything like that either in the recent chapters nor the original thread, but that alone is a strange way to argue that this means every God should be able to create universes. Hierarchies don't necessarily have to be about power or potency, the Otsutsuki Gods can possess different abilities while also no formal hierarchy (as a clan, for instance). To claim they lack any concept of hierarchy at all (this is really what this claim actually is, that's why I find it strange) is weird at best and unfounded at worst.

 

[SweetDao]

I dont remember anywhere on this site where its against the rules to confront a staff not doing his job properly. If I feel like you aren't doing your job properly I can call you out whenever I want as long as I'm not cursing or insulting you. Or maybe I'm missing something. Someone enlighten me.

I think if you're actually having problems with that specific staff, it would be more productive to report it to HR staff instead of venting your anger (justified or not) on a thread, BUT you can do whatever, as you said; besides being civil, I don't think it's forbidden to do so.

 

[KingTempest]

I dont remember anywhere on this site where its against the rules to confront a staff not doing his job properly. If I feel like you aren't doing your job properly I can call you out whenever I want as long as I'm not cursing or insulting you. Or maybe I'm missing something. Someone enlighten me.

If you're tackling me not doing my job well because I'm a One Piece fan and you think I refuse to do so when I'm not entitled to go and drop a paragraph when I said "I agree with the OP" then go and take me to Human Resources and stop bothering me mid thread. I verbally said that I was going to go eat then come back and give my reasons. Your words do nothing for this thread. Quite literally not a speck of purpose do your words of "Ngl you're being biased and illogical. Weird coming from a staff member. But then again, you're a one piece fan. Not trying to be rude but not surprised considering your history" hold. That's just a random personal attack.

I verbally said already I was going to type my reason up. In fact, I already started. I have a paragraph up already in typing but I held it off so I could nip this headache of a message at the bud. So if you have anything actually beneficial to say, go ahead, but if you want to call me bias for AGREEING and say it's cause I'm a One Piece fan then I will continue to tell you to stfu and go away.

 

[Tdjwo]

I think if you're actually having problems with that specific staff, it would be more productive to report it to HR staff instead of venting your anger (justified or not) on a thread, BUT you can do whatever, as you said; besides being civil, I don't think it's forbidden to do so.

I'm not even angry tho. I'm just voicing my opinion on his actions. Like I said, I'm not even mad. I just pointed out what I think he's doing wrong. Its not worth taking to HR for me.

If you're tackling me not doing my job well because I'm a One Piece fan and you think I refuse to do so when I'm not entitled to go and drop a paragraph when I said "I agree with the OP" then go and take me to Human Resources and stop bothering me mid thread. I verbally said that I was going to go eat then come back and give my reasons. Your words do nothing for this thread. Quite literally not a speck of purpose do your words of "Ngl you're being biased and illogical. Weird coming from a staff member. But then again, you're a one piece fan. Not trying to be rude but not surprised considering your history" hold. That's just a random personal attack.

I verbally said already I was going to type my reason up. In fact, I already started. I have a paragraph up already in typing but I held it off so I could nip this headache of a message at the bud. So if you have anything actually beneficial to say, go ahead, but if you want to call me bias for AGREEING and say it's cause I'm a One Piece fan then I will continue to tell you to stfu and go away.

Dude, like I said previously, nothing here so far warrants me taking you to HR. I'm not mad or angry. I simply see and sense some sort of bias which I pointed out. Yes, you did say you were typing up something to support OP's proposal, but my point was regarding you acknowledging OP provided close to no important evidence to support his claim but still agreeing with him without even attempting to explain why you do agree. That is not something a staff member does. At most, what I see is staff members agreeing based on JUSTIFICATIONS. Not half-assed posts. But if you can't see where I'm coming from, thats fine.

Oh also, "stfu and do your job."

 

[Richardo908]

I guess my argument here is that Momoshiki was potentially talking about the Creator Otsutsuki God here when he refers to the peerless, one-of-a-kind existence here, not just the state of being as a Otsutsuki God but I guess the latter also has merit. That's why later I'm confused about why we're equating a being who is said to be peerless and unique and saying that any Otsutsuki God can do what whatever he did (which would be rather un-unique of him obviously).

This section is a bit incoherent IMO. So, in one instance you say that full control over Omnipotence is inherent to the existence of a God, and that other beings such as Eida cannot possess full control over it. In the next section you claim that ONLY God can have access to it at all and that to not be a God is to not have access to it. So, which is it? Eida clearly has it if a bit limited in scope and potency. Also, the point about no hierarchy seems like a weird conjecture made up to argue the universal part. I can accept that if there were some implication of that in the source material but not only do I not find anything like that either in the recent chapters nor the original thread, but that alone is a strange way to argue that this means every God should be able to create universes. Hierarchies don't necessarily have to be about power or potency, the Otsutsuki Gods can possess different abilities while also no formal hierarchy (as a clan, for instance). To claim they lack any concept of hierarchy at all (this is really what this claim actually is, that's why I find it strange) is weird at best and unfounded at worst.

The manga actually makes it clear that within the otsutsuki gods there is no hierarchy. Momoshiki literally said that god's used omnipotence to create worlds meaning it's something that every otsutsuki god should be capable of. Isshiki talking about peerless beings was in reference to 3d creatures not otsutsuki gods who are 4d

 

[Shadow7001]

Just clarifying here if no one has yet noticed, I don't agree with OP's specific reason since, and I mean no offense, it's just a poorly written and rushed CRT and there's no other way to put it, but because I find other issues in the rating itself. That's why my arguments have almost nothing to do with the OP. If that's problematic, I can stop arguing for now and save them potentially for a different thread.

 

[HelloThere1089]

If it has nothing to do with the OP, then it can wait for a separate CRT

 

[KingTempest]

Sorry king, but you’ll actually have to give a reason or specify exactly what you’re agreeing with. Most issues brought up in this thread were already raised and answered in the old one, and then once again dismantled here. Agreeing to a null premise won’t put you in a good light.

Heard that though.

First of all I'm pretty sure with a verse as big as Naruto/Boruto you need 3 staff agreeals for it but since it went through I don't really care too much.

Regarding the OP​

The Otsutsuki do come from a different planet. They aren't predatehistoryesque individuals, they come from another planet, meaning that if that planet predated them, the universe predated them.

The lore of the Otsutsuki is not that they just had ancient gods who created the universe and everything in it. Momoshiki's statement was not referring to any transcendent individuals who existed prior to the birth of the universe. It was referring to those who were TURNED into gods (notice how he blatantly said BECAME). And as we know, the only way you turn into an otsutsuki god is if you eat the fruit of divine trees, said fruit that is rooted from the chakra of planets, said planets (which have to be a diabolical crap ton) which come from the already existing universe.

The entire point of the Otsutsuki will is that they are a race of mortal aliens meant to endlessly evolve until they reach godhood, which contradicts the belief that there were previously existing deities that just created the world. And that could be deduced I guess, but to deduce that from the statements of Momoshiki who is blatantly speaking about those who already exist, that just shows that this is wrong.

The previous OP can't use statements of "people evolved through these existing planets to create these pre-existing planets that predate them", that's just wrong.

I noted that I agree with the OP because the OP made a point. It was horribly written but it was a point.

Even in the previous OP, they blatantly say this

In the Road of Boruto guidebook, it’s stated that “an Ōtsutsuki became a god,” referring to Eida’s Omnipotence who comes from shibai. This could indeed imply Shibai, but we don’t need to go that far for our reasoning. What matters is that this act was performed by a god of the same power and nature as Shibai.

The nature of Shibai is that he was a mortal who became an immortal through the usage of frequent god trees. If he's of the same nature, and it's blatantly said that an otsutsuki became a god, then we can deduce that the same nature being spoken of is the divine nature that was given based on constant evolution based on the pre-existent planets.

TLDR

Otsutsuki gods only exist when Otsutsuki evolve -> Otsutsuki evolve when they eat chakra fruits -> chakra fruits come from planets -> you can't have an otsutsuki god without planets -> an otsutsuki god couldn't have created everything in existence if he needed that existence to become a god -> an otsutsuki god didn't create everything in existence

My personal reasons​

I find the argument of the "Genesis" being one of the weakest tier 2 arguments on the site. And not to diss the previous OP but moreso the line of logic that made it through.

The abuse of the phrase "genesis" and "world" to directly mean that it formed universe seems like a big leap in logic. Like said, it's very akin to when Naruto said the sage created everything but then we saw he was born on earth. It's the same leap of logic

Genesis refers to the origin of something. It's not specifically meant for the birth of the universe no it's meant for the origin of something. Ex Nihilo gets the point out more but even that doesn't work. With that being said, Naruto as a series, and I guess Kishimoto and Ikemoto, are not so vague as to try to say "the world" and mean the further unexplored cosmos. Whenever they feel like it they will emphasize larger bodies, which is why occasionally they use universe and space-time and such.

The databook post talking about their goals and purpose is that they evolve through the need of other planets.

The OP used a needless jump in logic to say "worlds is wrong, it means universe" without a speck of japanese dissection (and the only japanese translations he did use said world), and he tried to use the biblical genesis example of genesis, and to note that there's gods who did a genesis, as a way of saying "Boruto gods pulled a biblical God and made the universe". It's a very flimsy jjk buddhist real world connection point esque argument.

 

[Optimus.negz]

Shibai got universal+ off these statements one from momoshiki and one from the Boruto data base. These are not definitive statements at all this just lore or rumors based on the fact they used the word said. Which is a word used to avoid committing to a truth asserted by the speaker

"be asserted or reported (often used to avoid committing the speaker or writer to the truth of the assertion)."

Omnipotence can't do anything and everything this is a classic hyperbolic statement used for reality warping powers typically these powers always have limitations. This has happened before with Creation of all things and the 10 tails being stated to create everything. How they have created everything if Omnipotence made everything? These are clearly hyperbolic statements here the 10 tails is stated to be a parasite and Creation of all things has limitations



Momoshiki even says Omnipotence doesn't work on the user or the caster which completely debunks what he just said. Furthermore the otsutsuki clan is only 1000s of years old according to isshiki so theirs no way they could have made the universe which is more then millions of years old at least

So I'm suggesting the complete removal of universal+ with Omnipotence.

hey, I'm from Shin Jutsu, to speak for him
First of all you say that as Momoshiki says "they say" that it's not valid or that it takes away the value of veracity but unfortunately you don't take into account the narrative context and the function of a character like momoshiki at that moment, Momoshiki is an ōtsutsuki whose knowledge is a greater supported by the narration, Momoshiki claims that he knows all the shinjutsu and that he has lived in this plane far too long, moreover all the additional information such as the fact that Boruto advanced genetically during his translation into ōtsutsuki, the extinction of Isshiki's soul, the fact that thoughts are shared with boruto... ect in the chapter, 79 we are introduced to omnipotence and it is precisely Momoshiki who explains to us how it works and its origins at the same time as Eida takes action so in the context and the scene there is no reason why Momoshiki Ment + is confirmed in the Road of Boruto and even in the Volume where Ikemoto saysCLEARLY "the ōtsutsuki who became God created the World with omnipotence" so at that point it is more induced with a "it is said that" but it is AFFIRMING so concretely your first proposition is false Then I agree with you on the fact that the "RW&INFO T2 MANIP" these statements in Cross-verse are subject to the "NO LIMITS FALLACY" but I find that you are off-topic or either that apply something in a bad context, you say that typically they have a limit except that this is in the context of a cross-verse like if it's not the "OMNIPOTENCE" hax its necessarily will have a limit but it's not what that I am trying to argue about an "ABSOLUTE OMNIPOTENCE", what I am trying to say via the narration of omnipotence is that it is the + great Technique of the "NARUT/BORUTO" Franchise and therefore its feat it would therefore be + powerful than any other. Now within the confines of the NARUTO/BORUTO universe Omnipotence is able to DO EVERYTHINGwhich is totally logical due to the narrative of omnipotence. Then "Omnipotence created everything" All we know is that omnipotence created the universe of Naruto not the whole cosmo knowing that it is ôtsutsuki became God so before there was implicitly something before and the fact that there is a GOD who created everything with omnipotence contradicts it in what?, Ten tails is a parasite??? where did you read that? put the panels of your affirmations and please don't make say implications that are mine and don't quote them and say after "it's contradictary" people don't know what you are talking about. So to come back to the counter-argument, it's not because the ōtsutsuki resist Eida's omnipotence that the feat doesn't work, what I'm doing is a logical pre-supposition when I said that The Omnipotence of the Gods walk on the ōtsutsuki but its debunk in no way the creation of the universe, Then use a fallacy of appeal to realityto say that the universe has the same date as ours (knowing that ours is Billions of years old) then we know that the ōtsutsuki have several dimensions, travel from universe to universe so the universe of Naruto/boruto is not the only one knowing that Isshiki technically does not know the gods so not their date of appearance or their conversion so there is only Momoshiki who has a narra on it moreover you have refuted the other arguments like "Genesis" "Range in relation to Eida"... In conclusion, Shibai still remains in TIER 2

 

[Foriaa]

No dhead shit but the way you type is lowkey kinda hard to read

 

[rogueprestonian]

I assume this isn’t staff only.
After reading through everything so far on the thread, i will have to disagree.
Most of all OP’s points were false equivalency’s and personal assumptions as well as claiming evidence as hyperbolic without any proof as such.
In contrast all the evidence including the previous CRT linked have more validity and proof backing their claims. The database is clearly supported in story via Momoshiki’s statement which as far as I know is stated as fact not an assumption.

 

[Richardo908]

Heard that though.

First of all I'm pretty sure with a verse as big as Naruto/Boruto you need 3 staff agreeals for it but since it went through I don't really care too much.

Regarding the OP​

The Otsutsuki do come from a different planet. They aren't predatehistoryesque individuals, they come from another planet, meaning that if that planet predated them, the universe predated them.

The lore of the Otsutsuki is not that they just had ancient gods who created the universe and everything in it. Momoshiki's statement was not referring to any transcendent individuals who existed prior to the birth of the universe. It was referring to those who were TURNED into gods (notice how he blatantly said BECAME). And as we know, the only way you turn into an otsutsuki god is if you eat the fruit of divine trees, said fruit that is rooted from the chakra of planets, said planets (which have to be a diabolical crap ton) which come from the already existing universe.

The entire point of the Otsutsuki will is that they are a race of mortal aliens meant to endlessly evolve until they reach godhood, which contradicts the belief that there were previously existing deities that just created the world. And that could be deduced I guess, but to deduce that from the statements of Momoshiki who is blatantly speaking about those who already exist, that just shows that this is wrong.

The previous OP can't use statements of "people evolved through these existing planets to create these pre-existing planets that predate them", that's just wrong.

I noted that I agree with the OP because the OP made a point. It was horribly written but it was a point.

Even in the previous OP, they blatantly say this

The nature of Shibai is that he was a mortal who became an immortal through the usage of frequent god trees. If he's of the same nature, and it's blatantly said that an otsutsuki became a god, then we can deduce that the same nature being spoken of is the divine nature that was given based on constant evolution based on the pre-existent planets.

TLDR

Otsutsuki gods only exist when Otsutsuki evolve -> Otsutsuki evolve when they eat chakra fruits -> chakra fruits come from planets -> you can't have an otsutsuki god without planets -> an otsutsuki god couldn't have created everything in existence if he needed that existence to become a god -> an otsutsuki god didn't create everything in existence

My personal reasons​

I find the argument of the "Genesis" being one of the weakest tier 2 arguments on the site. And not to diss the previous OP but moreso the line of logic that made it through.

The abuse of the phrase "genesis" and "world" to directly mean that it formed universe seems like a big leap in logic. Like said, it's very akin to when Naruto said the sage created everything but then we saw he was born on earth. It's the same leap of logic

Genesis refers to the origin of something. It's not specifically meant for the birth of the universe no it's meant for the origin of something. Ex Nihilo gets the point out more but even that doesn't work. With that being said, Naruto as a series, and I guess Kishimoto and Ikemoto, are not so vague as to try to say "the world" and mean the further unexplored cosmos. Whenever they feel like it they will emphasize larger bodies, which is why occasionally they use universe and space-time and such.

The databook post talking about their goals and purpose is that they evolve through the need of other planets.

The OP used a needless jump in logic to say "worlds is wrong, it means universe" without a speck of japanese dissection (and the only japanese translations he did use said world), and he tried to use the biblical genesis example of genesis, and to note that there's gods who did a genesis, as a way of saying "Boruto gods pulled a biblical God and made the universe". It's a very flimsy jjk buddhist real world connection point esque argument.

The lore of the otsutsuki actually says that they created the universe, implying that the otsutsuki did not create the world because they consume planets makes no sense narratively. The Naruto website literally says the otsutsuki created the world https://naruto-official.com/en/news/01_1691 we also don't know who he exactly the first otsutsuki god was or how he became a god all we know is that otsutsuki strive to become like him by consuming planets something shibai managed to achieve. The first otsutsuki god might have no need to consume planets, also momoshiki statements makes it clear that several otsutsuki gods have created worlds or universe so what's stopping an otsutsuki god from literally creating a new universe in order to continue harvesting chakra fruit. Since characters like momoshiki and kaguya found it necessary to create worlds,what proof do you have that otsutsuki do not create new worlds or planets to replace old ones

 

[Ghostimuscrime]

No dhead shit but the way you type is lowkey kinda hard to read

at least they typed it out themselves instead of asking AI, gotta appreciate that in this day and age

 

[Foriaa]

yea i fw that

 

[KingTempest]

The lore of the otsutsuki actually says that they created the universe, implying that the otsutsuki did not create the world because they consume planets makes no sense narratively. The Naruto website literally says the otsutsuki created the world https://naruto-official.com/en/news/01_1691 we also don't know who he exactly the first otsutsuki god was or how he became a god all we know is that otsutsuki strive to become like him by consuming planets something shibai managed to achieve. The first otsutsuki god might have no need to consume planets, also momoshiki statements makes it clear that several otsutsuki gods have created worlds or universe so what's stopping an otsutsuki god from literally creating a new universe in order to continue harvesting chakra fruit. Since characters like momoshiki and kaguya found it necessary to create worlds,what proof do you have that otsutsuki do not create new worlds or planets to replace old ones

The context of that "create worlds" is quite literally given in the other pages of the same chapter to talk about how they rewrote already existing planets.

I see no reason for this to even go above planetary much less UNIVERSAL. World doesn't need to mean universe, and for a universe that predates these individuals, it just comes off a lot as an unsupported contradicted theory instead of actual canon

 

[Richardo908]

The context of that "create worlds" is quite literally given in the other pages of the same chapter to talk about how they rewrote already existing planets.

I see no reason for this to even go above planetary much less UNIVERSAL. World doesn't need to mean universe, and for a universe that predates these individuals, it just comes off a lot as an unsupported contradicted theory instead of actual canon

Because the term "World" does not apply to momoshiki the same way it applies to boruto. Do you think an otsutsuki who has spent thousands of years devouring planets would use world when referencing a single planet. Momoshiki literally travelled from galaxy to Galaxy assuming he meant a single planet while using the term World makes zero sense since earth ain't even his planet

 

[KingTempest]

Because the term "World" does not apply to momoshiki the same way it applies to boruto. Do you think an otsutsuki who has spent thousands of years devouring planets would use world when referencing a single planet. Momoshiki literally travelled from galaxy to Galaxy assuming he meant a single planet while using the term World makes zero sense since earth ain't even his planet

He literally said worlds. He also said humankind.
Your point blatantly just isn't right.

 

[Richardo908]

The context of that "create worlds" is quite literally given in the other pages of the same chapter to talk about how they rewrote already existing planets.

I see no reason for this to even go above planetary much less UNIVERSAL. World doesn't need to mean universe, and for a universe that predates these individuals, it just comes off a lot as an unsupported contradicted theory instead of actual canon

Also an otsutsuki created the universe so clearly the universe might predate momoshiki, isshiki or kaguya but that does not mean it predates them all. You have no proof of this

 

[KingTempest]

Also an otsutsuki created the universe so clearly the universe might predate momoshiki, isshiki or kaguya but that does not mean it predates them all. You have no proof of this

Do you not understand the point of this thread?????

 

[Richardo908]

He literally said worlds. He also said humankind.
Your point blatantly just isn't right.

Bro you have to realize that momoshiki created a seed bed world why would he hail the ability the way he did if it could only create a planet something he's capable of doing himself

 

[KingTempest]

Bro you have to realize that momoshiki created a seed bed world why would he hail the ability the way he did if it could only create a planet something he's capable of doing himself

okay. i'll give you grace cause you're new on this website. Richardo it's nice to meet you.

the way this site goes is that things being argued about cannot be used for arguments. for example, if you were to argue a person is continental for blowing up a continent, but we see the continent is still there, then you say that "well they said he destroyed the continent", you can't do that.

The entire context of this conversation is the context of these statements and what they refer to.

The website does not make its own claims. It restates the same claims of the manga from a more overall stance. AKA if Boruto said "he moves at mach 8", the website would just say "the mach 8 attacker".

The point is that we are trying to figure out if shibai is universal or not. we're also trying to figure out whether the scans said otsutsuki gods created the universe or not.
it never says that they did create the universe. this is wrong and this is flawed.

so in a conversation about "did it say they created the universe?", you can't say "bro it says they created the universe". that's the part that's being dissected.

So again, the context of the statements does not have enough JUSTIFICATION to say that it's referring to the universe. And even if it did, it is contradicted by the statements that someone who BECAME A GOD, which requires the universe's planets, to have made that same universe.

Does this make sense?

 

[Foriaa]

not tryna derail but what's going to happen to his hde

 

[KingTempest]

not tryna derail but what's going to happen to his hde

he can keep his HDE, his HDE and his tier 2 rating are separate

 

[Foriaa]

ahh i see

 

[HelloThere1089]

Genesis refers to the origin of something. It's not specifically meant for the birth of the universe no it's meant for the origin of something. Ex Nihilo gets the point out more but even that doesn't work. With that being said, Naruto as a series, and I guess Kishimoto and Ikemoto, are not so vague as to try to say "the world" and mean the further unexplored cosmos. Whenever they feel like it they will emphasize larger bodies, which is why occasionally they use universe and space-time and such.

Since I am short on time, I will just address this point specifically and argue the rest later. Your claim that the word genesis refers to the origin of something has been discussed in the past thread already and isn't the topic of this thread. However in case someone is swayed by this, I'd like to try and address this here.

In your link there are two versions of the word, "genesis" and "Genesis". The word used in the scan afaik is "創世" (do correct me if I am wrong on this). Now I am not a translator or anything even close, but AI gave me this response when I tried to dissect the word:

Spoiler: Translations

"創世" in Japanese translates to "creation of the world" or "genesis" (specifically the cosmic or primordial creation), rather than generic creation of something.[en.wiktionary]

Kanji Breakdown​

• 創 (sō): creation, establishment.
• 世 (sei): world, generation.[en.wiktionary]

Usage Context​

Commonly refers to mythological origins (e.g., "創世神話" for creation myths) or biblical Genesis, not everyday inventions.[ejje.weblio]

The english word genesis might have different meanings, but the japanese word seems to have one.

Obviously this isn't ideal and should be inspected by people more qualified here. But I just wanted to draw attention to this point of genesis referring to merely anything as opposed to having cosmological ties.

 

[KingTempest]

Since I am short on time, I will just address this point specifically and argue the rest later. Your claim that the word genesis refers to the origin of something has been discussed in the past thread already and isn't the topic of this thread. However in case someone is swayed by this, I'd like to try and address this here.

In your link there are two versions of the word, "genesis" and "Genesis". The word used in the scan afaik is "創世". Now I am not a translator or anything even close, but AI gave me this response when I tried to dissect the word:

Spoiler: Translations

"創世" in Japanese translates to "creation of the world" or "genesis" (specifically the cosmic or primordial creation), rather than generic creation of something.[en.wiktionary]

Kanji Breakdown​

• 創 (sō): creation, establishment.
• 世 (sei): world, generation.[en.wiktionary]

Usage Context​

Commonly refers to mythological origins (e.g., "創世神話" for creation myths) or biblical Genesis, not everyday inventions.[ejje.weblio]

Obviously this isn't ideal and should be inspected by people more qualified here. But I just wanted to draw attention to this point of genesis referring to merely anything as opposed to having cosmological ties.

I don't think my intention was to say it was just generic creation and if it came off like that then I apologize, but my point was to signify that although it does refer to creation, it's not instantly talking about the damn universe

 

[Shadow7001]

Yeah I will say, now that KingTempest also voiced it, but that genesis point is super flimsy and I'm honestly baffled that was allowed to fly at all on the previous thread. I was thinking of pointing it out too but decided to save it for a different thread; but yes the term genesis broadly refers to the origin of something, using its Biblical definition is kind of ridiculous in this way and honestly supported by nothing as far as the source material in concerned. And while it's true that "world" doesn't just mean planet immediately, it also doesn't necessarily mean a universe with its space-time continuum either. Both are far too specific here for what, if we're being honest with ourselves, ends up being a super vague statement that I'm honestly not sure is even tierable, and immediately assuming its highest possible interpretation is rather flimsy IMO. I would've liked if it were just "higher with Omnipotence" for now and wait for more concrete evidence in the future.

 

[KingTempest]

Yeah I will say, now that KingTempest also voiced it, but that genesis point is super flimsy and I'm honestly baffled that was allowed to fly at all on the previous thread. I was thinking of pointing it out too but decided to save it for a different thread; but yes the term genesis broadly refers to the origin of something, using its Biblical definition is kind of ridiculous in this way and honestly supported by nothing as far as the source material in concerned. And while it's true that "world" doesn't just mean planet immediately, it also doesn't necessarily mean a universe with its space-time continuum either. Both are far too specific here for what, if we're being honest with ourselves, ends up being a super vague statement that I'm honestly not sure is even tierable, and immediately assuming its highest possible interpretation is rather flimsy IMO. I would've liked if it were just "higher with Omnipotence" for now and wait for more concrete evidence in the future.

 

[HelloThere1089]

Since part of my comment is being ignored here, I'd like to again draw attention to the fact that the word seems to commonly refer to mythological origins. So arguing that connecting it to the book of genesis is wrong is unfounded.

 

[Exoko]

AI gave me this response when I tried to dissect the word:

akin to your meaning

Shouldn’t trust it too much since it can tailor answers to your liking, here is what GPT said for me,

 

[HelloThere1089]

Shouldn’t trust it too much since it can tailor answers to your liking, here is what GPT said for me,

My intention was to draw attention of experts to the point. However the screenshot you provided isn't really contrary to mine.

 

[KingTempest]

Since part of my comment is being ignored here, I'd like to again draw attention to the fact that the word seems to commonly refer to mythological origins. So arguing that connecting it to the book of genesis is wrong is unfounded.

The word Genesis refers to mythological origins because the biggest instance of the word is from the book of Genesis in the bible.
But all because it refers to mythological instances because of the bible, it doesn't mean it refers to mythological instances EXACTLY LIKE the bible.

Genesis talks about how God created the universe. If someone said the genesis of the world referring to a multiverse would we downgrade it and say "genesis refers to single universe"?

Even the history of the earth can be mythological. Mythological ≠ universal

 

[AyOgUyS]

Since part of my comment is being ignored here, I'd like to again draw attention to the fact that the word seems to commonly refer to mythological origins. So arguing that connecting it to the book of genesis is wrong is unfounded.

buddy you can't just connect anything to mythology bruh

 

[Exoko]

isn't really contrary to mine

Weren’t you trying to say that it directly referred to cosmological creation and nothing else?
That was the gist I got from your comment.

But yeah getting a translator would be best, but it might take a while

 

[KingTempest]

Even with a translator it doesn't make a difference. Genesis has no reason to mean BIRTH OF THE UNIVERSE

 

[Foriaa]

one of you guys should lowk ping the staff who interacted with the upgrade thread to see if their opinions changed after these pages of back and forth