Forum:Zaraki after Tosen

I know this has been an issue of debate, but, I believe the manga shows fairly concrete evidence Tosen became a Captain before Zaraki.

http://www.onemanga.com/Bleach/146/02/

From what the flashback shows, we see Tosen with a haori as Zaraki claims his. The only other explanation is his jacket from serving under Kensei, but, that had a turned up and noticeable collar. Thus, I believe that perhaps this clears things up. One eye 17:15, September 12, 2009 (UTC)

Actually, that picture shows Komamura standing beside Tousen (look above the speech bubble), so this had to be after TBtP, since Komamura was not a captain during TBtP, nor did he wear the white coats of the ninth division guys. Just in case anyone asks, you can tell it is Komamura because he is so much taller than Tousen (the shoulder is higher up than Tousen's head), has a sleeveless haori with a black sleeve sticking out of it, and has those armour things on his shoulder. --Yyp 17:34, September 12, 2009 (UTC)

Despite the fact that Kubo like many creators can choose to later change his mind on such things which in this case he seems to have done. There really is no concrete evidence to prove it regardless of a little flashback by tosen, it can be dispelled by actual confirmation through conversation or a full detailed flashback discussing past events similar to tbtp.Salubri 17:38, September 12, 2009 (UTC)

Wow, very interesting. I never noticed that. By this picture its my understanding that Zarkai became captain after Tousen and Komamura. But like Salubri stated Kudo can later choose to change this since it was never confirmed by conversation or more detailed flash back. Although I dont see where Kudo has changed this Salubri unless your stating about the comment made in the TBTP series which still does not 100% confirm it. But I personally feel between this picture and the Bount Arc (Yes I'm playing that card). That Zarkai did in fact become Captain after TBTP and was not the Kenpachi missing from the Captains meeting.Quadrupus 18:39, September 12, 2009 (UTC)

Well if your going that route then you would have to prove that zaraki does not fit the traits they describe in the conversation or that he didn't kill the previous captain of the 11th division, which we know for a fact that he did as well as the only known captain to do so. Also TbTP takes place as the newest material from kubo himself, the bount arc is just anime filler taking place right after the defection of aizen (who knows who had there hands in that). Not to mention as noted the white jacket was common issue during the time of muguruma's captaincy. Also in the bount arc tosen's appearance is slightly different.Salubri 18:50, September 12, 2009 (UTC)


 * We don't know who is standing near Tosen, and for me it seems to be someones standing on the foreground and Tosen is watching from the background. In the TBTP, Love stated that it is a habit from the Kempachis to beat the previous one by strength use (it is a Kempachi trait), then there is nothing confirming that Zaraki was captain before nor after Tosen. Anyway, Zaraki and Yachiru have a confused timelines that would be explained next by Kubo.Baronofash 22:00, September 12, 2009 (UTC)

We are going that route so then you would also have to prove that no one (even people we don't know) doesn't fit that description. Which there isn't any possible way we can. Yes Zaraki killed the previous captain, but do we know if he was the only one ever to do it? No, we don't. And yes white jackets were common issue for Muguruma's squad members but there is a BIG BIG difference between the 2. The "white jacket" in the picutre above looks like a haori like Tosen wears. The white jacket from TBTP series has a large collar that extends up, and also the major difference is all of the white jackets from TBTP have squared off shoulders. Where in the picture above it clearly shows it does not. As for your claim that Tosen's appearance is slightly different from the flashback to the bount arc check again. His hair looks exactly the same just you can't see in the manga that it is pulled back. Episode 77 around 8:35 in.Quadrupus 16:40, September 13, 2009 (UTC)

This argument is pointless really. All will be revealed soon enough. This becomes the same issue about Tosen's zanpakuto all over again nobody says nothing but a old screen shot that ambiguous at best is fact for some people. anything i say against your idea is gonna have you say the opposite as that what you wanna believe. The fact is no we dont know if any other captains have been killed that way, but we do know of one for a fact as certain that no other captains or possible captains are involved in the conversation you go with the information your given. Secondly for the other response its stated that kenpachi is the title used by captains of the 11th division it never says anything about how the title is achieved other then the leader of the 11th by tradition taking the title upon gaining captaincy. The conversation is about those we do know we can talk for ever about possibilities. Personally i dont see why it matters if zaraki was a captain before tosen or not. Yama, Unohana, Ukitake and Shunsui were captains before Tosen big deal. The fact is tosen got beat by zaraki either way, with tosen using bankai and zaraki is still a captain and tosen isn't. Its as about as important as who was an espada first (as most of them are dead). Say for the sake of argument tosen was a captain first so then what, its a minor detail and the whole conversation on can be put to rest by something as simple as having one vizard mention that he was captain 110 years ago when we know tosen wasnt't. i'll just leave you guys to it then.Salubri 17:03, September 13, 2009 (UTC)

Too bad the card you play isn't valid. When trying to argue something as canon, non-canon sources are invalid no matter how many times you use it.Saimaroimaru 17:37, September 13, 2009 (UTC)

Since when does Zaraki pass up a chance for a fight? He would have been eager to get out there when the hollowification thing was happening. But the TBtP Kenpachi seemingly didn't bother. That does not sound like Zaraki at all. Also, Zaraki did attend all the captains meetings that were shown in the SS arc. He may do things his own way, but he did what was expected of a captain, apparently unlike the TBtP Kenpachi.

If it was Zaraki in TBtP, why make such a mystery about it? How hard would it have been to show Zaraki in one of those meetings? KT obviously didn't want to show the Kenpachi for some reason. But why - well that is a more interesting question to me. --Yyp 18:02, September 13, 2009 (UTC)


 * Part of the problem of the current Kenpachi being the same as one mentioned as the TBtP one is the presence of Yachiru who is roughly the age of a toddler in the present was shown to be a baby during Zaraki's flashback prior to becoming a captain. Granted we've never seen the TBtP Kenpachi, but the current Kenpachi is almost never seen without Yachiru with him except during captain's meetings and he does attend those even if he likes to go his own way. While shinigami age differently than humans though what the measurement in shinigami years to human years is unknown. Byakuya was looked like he was in his early teens 110 years while now he would appear to be a young adult; if this were being used as measurement of shinigami aging then Yachiru would have to be at least a pre-adolescent roughly 9 to 11 years old by now. Of course shinigami could age differently from each other.

Since Ikkaku knew about Urahara when he asked Ichigo who trained him that would most likely mean Kenpachi was the captain 100 years back, the one Shinji was complaining about.--SalmanH 20:20, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Possible, but not confirmed, since there was no confirmation that the Kenpachi of TBTP was the same as present-day Kenpachi Zaraki. Again, we're leaving it open as a possibility, but not as a fact, since we there isn't enough concrete evidence to support it. Arrancar109 20:50, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

But didn't Ikkaku join the 11th division shortly after Zaraki, although he could have heard rumors about Urahara and not actually have seen him so yeah I think you're right it's best to leave it for now.--SalmanH 08:17, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Tosens flashback shows when Kenpachi became a captain. Tosen was already a captain so it had to be after TBtP mini series. Therefore Kenpachi cannot have been a captain during the TBtP series.

Thats why this is a pointless conversation your tryin to use anime filler that causes a conflict with manga to prove your point. The fact is we don't know any other captain who has gotten their position by killing the previous captain per the rules of attaining captaincy but we also dont have direct confirmation that zaraki is the kenpachi in the past 110 years. Thus we its left up to possibility but that anime filler can't be used in this case as it totally takes out of context of what is established in the manga. The truth of it can only come from the manga which is directly from kubo.Salubri 18:54, October 4, 2009 (UTC)

Turn back the pendilium was part of the manga that Kubo wrote. Also chapter 146 pg 2 shows tosen as a captain when Kenpachi is a captain. Unless Tosen was a captain before Kensei then Kenpachi was not a captain 100 years ago.

You have to take into account that Kubo has the right to change his mind and considering what was shown in chapter 146, it was a nondescript and small shot and could have been at any time who knows, the point making that the tbtp is more for it then 146 is so theres the issue thats why its unimportant until it can be rightly confirmed.Salubri 02:19, October 5, 2009 (UTC)

Not to be disrespectful, but we can hardly consider that panel "unimportant." It is the only clear rendition we have of the period during which Zaraki became captain, sans the obviously uncanon anime. Tosen was clearly donning his captain haori, as well as the hair style he has during the Soul Society arc. The indication makes it clear that the Kenpachi in TBTP is NOT Zaraki. Kubo can change his mind, true enough - it's his manga after all. But he has shown nothing contrary to the page in question, so the statement is pointless anyway. Mohrpheus 03:49, October 6, 2009 (UTC)