Of course Sectumsampra was one of Severus's little expiriments so he kept it private, but what if Harry spread the word and it actually started to become as mastered as the accio charm. Do you think the Ministry of Magic would label it as an unforgivable curse? I think they would here is why.

Sectumsampra is pretty much like avada kedavra if not worse.
It can kill you from severe lacerations and major blood loss.
It is even worse because instead of the avada kedavra's instant death, it is slow and painful.
I think the only way it might be better than the avada kedavra is the amount of time it gives you to heal yourself or maybe someone finds you bleeding and heals you.
It is a savage killer too, i think it should be counted as an unforgivable curse. How about you?

Interesting thoughts about it...

I would say it's possible that it could become 'Unforgivable', but we must wait and see. I think it all comes down to whether or not the curse is reversable and block-able. I think that it fails both of these, as Snape blocks it when Harry tries to use it on him, and he also mends-up Malfoy. So, no, it probably won't become an 'Unforgivable Curse', but you never know...

It sure is a nasty bit of work, though...

Well we really dont know the ture nature of the spell. It could be a spell to merely cut thing, or shred them... or something. Maybe it was actually intended to be used to trim bushes, though that is unlikely because besides the spell it said "for enemies" . I think it is the same spell we see used many times in the battle in the DoM in the fifth book. Though personally I dont think its is strong enough to become an unforgiveable curse.

I believe that it would become an Unforgivable curse because even though it can be blocked and whatnot, it is just as bad if not worse than avada kadavra and is only something that is purposly used by Dark wizards

who knows if the blood spilling out from you is actually yours? do you know what i mean? the spell might give off the appearance that you're being torn to shreds, but is your body actually shedding blood or does the spell give off the appearance of shedding blood? i think also that draco wasn't actually hurt, but seeing himself being torn apart was enough to make his body feel as though he actually was.

a little farfetched but just a suspicion.

i think it will not be an unforgivable curse, i think the three cover it, pain death and control, other curses are not worse, they do not instantly kill you, giving you time to save yourself, they can not cause nearly as much pain as crucio, because the longbottoms were driven mad from the pain, and i dont think anything else can bend people to someone elses will, so i think that becuase these three are the worst possible they are unforgivable, others may be illegal, but not unforgivable.

No i believe it actually does the damage, but you must remember, there are far worse spells that could be used against someone, that are common spells. Diffindo cuts or tears the thing in front of it, what if it were aimed at a throat or someother vital area, it too could be used a an unforgiveabe curse. And what about obliviate, it wipes the memory clean, and if done enough times it can seriously damage the mind of those it is casted upon. Its all about relevance with Unfogiveable curses. so again, I dont think Sectumsempra will be an unforgivable curse

yes like albus said there are plenty of curses that can be used for the wrong reason, but they can either be blocked or stopped, becuase the 3 unforgivable curses are the worst of their kind they are unforgivable.

Imperio=Blackmail
Crucio= I never felt a cruciatus curse but sectumsampra has to hurt also
Avada Kedavra= Many spells can kill you, but this does it in an instant

And snape blocked sectumsampra but he also blocked a unforgivable curse, harry fired crucio several times, but Snape blocking the spells means nothing when it comes to time to react because when you are a great legimens like Snape, you have time to react even to the avada kedavra.




But when you think about it, the way the avada kedavra kills is better then the way sectumsampre can kill, it is instant, painless, and over before you know it happens.
With Sectumsampra, you see blood rushing from your body, and lacerations, and worst of all, you feel it. And the way sectumsampra is described it is pretty quick, just like crucio and avada kedavra

I always thought with the combined spell to heal makes Sectumsempra one perfect torture spell.

How many times over will I need to slice you apart before you answer my question?

It seems the cuts don’t go that deep. The mental distress of seeing yourself or a loved one being the target would be huge and deliver results. It was probably Snape’s signature Death Eater spell.

I totally agree with you vortext!!
Sectusempra is horrible... Just the fact that it was Snape that invented it shows that it is totally able to be an unforgivable curse...
And even Snape himself admited that if he hadn't arived at time, Draco could have died... And if it kills...

Yes it kills, but it is blockable, and you are able to heal the wounds.... which is forgiveable. Like I said before.... you could most likely cut someone's throat with diffindo... or anyspell can be potentially dangerous. I do not think Sectumsempra should be an unforgiveable curse.... crucio cause the worst pain all over your body and mind, imperio takes away your self control... your decison in what you do.... and avada kadavra takes away your life completely and utterly... no blocking, no healing.... sectumsempra merely cuts you, and those cuts can be healed quite easily.




that is assuming severus snape is bad, which i would have to disagree with

~Albus

I know, I know... I said that because I really dislike snape, and that mess with my opinions!
Well, I have another question:
Sectusempra is an horrible curse, that cuts the body of the opponent in a terrible way, right? Should anybody that uses it go to Azkaban? I mean, it might not be unforgivable, those have their fame way high, but it's certainly worth for a wizard spent a long time in Azkaban?

I think that the kill, torture, and control curses are the only curses that should be unforgivable. Sectumsepra could also be used for other things just like Diffindo. The unforgivable curses can only be used one way. Kill, torture, and control. Unlike Sectumsepra, the unforgivable curses are irreversable. When Harry uses it on Malfoy, Snape heals him. The Longbottoms, however, can never be sane again.

-keelyn-

It's an interesting though, I must give you that. hmmm...





But I have to beleive that if Sectumsempra was know to all of the wizarding world for what it could do, that yes, it would become one. I think that what the fact why Snape kept it a secret. Because if he was found knowing such dark curses, let alone making that one up that he would deffinetly not be the potions master anymore. I mean, how care Dumbledore forgive that?

Hello all,

this is my 1st post for this topic... here are my 2 cents.

I have to agree with people that think that the sectumsempra is not known to the wizarding world. In his old potions school book Snape makes many changes, additions, and improvements.. all his own. I mean anything we see scribbled down in that book is original Snape's work; there is no reason to believe the sectumsempra spell is any different. About the coments that all 3 unforgivable curses are irreversible or blockable, I wanted to clear something out. The only unforgivable curse that is both unblockable and irreversible is the Avada Kedavra curse. The Crucio curse definetly causes a great deal of pain, but it is not immediately irreversible… the long bottoms are in St. Mungo’s because it was performed on them until they broke. The Imperio curse takes control away from you, but as we know [from Harry himself] a strong mind can break free from it or negate it all together.

As for the sectumsempra curse, I believe that if known to the wizarding community, it would be unforgivable. I mean Harry only did it once, but what if he had done 2 or 3 in a row? In essence I think if performed continuously it can cause irreversible damage.

I think this is a very interesting topic. I think that the damage that the Sectasempra curse causes is worthy of an Unforgivible Curse, and as you pointed out, it is not known there-fore there is no blocking it. I think that if Sectasempra became known to the Wizarding World, there would be four Unforgivable Curses, not three

Hello all

I was just thinking about that amanda1212... If sectumsempra is not known and because of it unblockable, could it become Harrys final weapon against Lord V?? It could definetly give Harry an edge at least??

yeh it could be a weapon but since right now voldemort is the most powerful wizard in the world, he should no how to seal a cut like that, so unless he somehow forgets how to do that i dont think it would help to much, unless in the instant he uses to repair his wounds harry kills him.

Sectum Sempra is definitely blockable: Snape did it.

Sectum Sempra is probably Snape's invention, but the only other (possible) use of it was when the death eater Dolohov had been stymied by a lip-locker curse, and he slashed with his wand while performing a non-verbal spell on Hermione. She said "Oh," and collapsed.



If Sectum Sempra were widely known, I'm sure it would be unforgivable. But a person can be sent to Azkaban for other activities than unforgivable curses. That is no doubt the Wizzengamot's position on many spells.

I think the point of the Sectumsempra curse in the story is to demonstrate how brute force is usually not the best way to solve a problem.. the big example is when Harry tries to use it against the inferi (sp?).. he uses it because his mind has gone blank and he forgets DD's instruction to use fire against them, so he uses the "lashing out" spell, perceptably the worst because of the effect (ie big blood spurts/gashes etc). This is a very violent curse, very physical, and kind of barbaric (not very "wizard " at all).

So when Harry tries it against the Inferi he fails because he was unable to use his mind, and uses a wizard version of blunt brute force (kind of brute over brains).

I don't think it will become an unforgivable, as there are many other curses that exist that cause pain, affect people's behaviour and such, and they are ot Unforgivable.

alright people now this is not the first time we have seen sectumsempra. if you had read the 5th book closly you would have seen during snapes worse memory snape used it on james
it said somthing like "snape flicked his wand and a slash of blood pored out of james." now what could that possibly mean? it means in my idea that it only can cause one gash at a time but when harry used it he swong his wand around alot witch caused a lot of gashes on malfoy


sorry if im off topic

As Severus says, we saw Snape use sectumsempra on James in the pensieve. Clearly, the spell is not guaranteed death. Harry is a powerful wizard who shouted a powerful spell. The effect was very strong. I don't think the typical person would be able to cause the damage that Harry did. It would be bad. It would likely kill someone, but it is not guaranteed to kill like AK.

Yea. actually i think they probably would have to. it is pretty harmful. but its so mad! I didn't know we saw Snape do it in the penseive? must have missed that part?

Yes we saw snape do it in the pensive.



*"bad luck, prongs," said Sirius briskly, turning back to Snape. "OY!" But too late; Snape had directed his wand straight at james; there was a flash of light and a gash appeared on the side of Jame's face, spattering his robes with blood.*



see this is the same spell that Harry used but not in a strong magnitude Snape can controll how the spell effects the victim of the end of the curse.


also rember Harry waved his wand around madly when he used it on Malfoy so it is like a giant sword but it cut Malfoy abuch of times but when Snape used it he didn't move his wand and made a small gash so this proves what i've been saying

we deont know if the curse in the pensive was secumpstra it could have been something different and i dont think it will become an unforgiveable curse because it can be healed

"I think it all comes down to whether or not the curse is reversable and block-able. "

That's not what makes a curse unforgiveable. The only unblockable one of the three is AK. You can block the other two.

I agree. Considering how powerful and dangerous the Sectumsempra spell is, if the rest of the Wizarding World knew of it's power and what it could do, then I'm sure they would classify it as an Unforgivable Curse.

Something came to mind, though, and that is: Perhaps Dumbledore knew something about this curse or some form of it. Then again, perhaps not, it would depend if he ever saw the book, which somehow seems unlikely, but you can't help question Dumbledore, seeing how powerful he is, and the amount of knowledge he contains inside that brain of his.

To me, it's almost safer for the Ministry and the rest of the wizarding world doesn't know Sectumsempra, because that would cause even more choas among the people and keep them in fear of that certain spell.

mmm...interesting. personally I don't think its' an unforgivable. I mean all it does is make the victim bleed a lot. not go insane, be controlled or die, like all the others'.

i think that sectumsempra should be an unforgivable. the results of the curse seem worse than the cruciatus. the thing is after performing it himself and seeing the damage that he's caused i'm sure that harry is going to try and keep that spell under wraps. if he told people about that spell he would automatically be associated with it and he doesnt want that. i think that harry is going to let that spell disappear from the world and that is the best thing. we dont need another way for Voldemort to torture us.

It's not the fact that it is bad or the effects are terrible, it's the fact weather or not who uses it, Diflindo could be a Unforgivible cuz if you use it wrong you could cut someone. it all depends on the user.

I'm sorry serverus snape but i don't think that really makes sense. you're saying that any spell could be an unforgivable curse depending on the user and the way you use it but if i was an auror who used avada kedavra on a DE for the right reasons i would still get sent to azkaban for using an unforgivable. the point is this spell is way too dangerous to allow people to use it whenever they feel like it. there is no need for this spell except to inflict pain upon your enemy and i think that puts it in the unforgivable curse category.

Are we sure it would have killed someone? We have never seen the effects going that far, only with Draco when blood spurted out of him. However, we are not sure that it would have killed Draco, only injured him. If it did kill people, I am sure that it would be unforgivable. But, we can conclude that Snape probably used it on other people since he made it, and yet we don't hear of Snape killing anyone while he was at Hogwarts.

I guess that all of the Unfogivable curses have one characteristic in common: they have no countercurse, and only the caster can lift them. Once you are hit by the spell, you can do nothing about it, nor can other people (this goes for the cruciatus and the imperius). If you are hit by the avada kedavra, well...unless you have good relexes and duck in time, you can't save yourself (obviusly not including Harry's special case).

i feel that the only reason why sectumsempra would not become an unforgivable curse is for the reason the KatherinePG stated, which is that all the unforgivable curses have no counter-curse and can only be stopped by the spell caster even though now that i think about it, might not rule out sectumsempra entirely

There's not one classification for that spell except 'Unforgivable' ! Some might not agree but I think it is very evil. I agree that it's worse than the worst current unforgivable, the Avada Kedavra!

Hi, a Head Auror will contact you shortly.

i think that it could be classified as a unforgivable curse. i mean all the others inflict pain or torture or they cause it. sectumsempra falls in this category for sure. but it may be deflected by certain people. what i mean is that depending on how much hatred you can put behind the certain spell and also depending on how powerful the opposing wizard depends on if they can block it. but this has to be classified as a unforgivable. most of the spells are only used to subdue the attacker in some way. this one in paticular doesn't. but i won't be surprised if it is qualified as a unforgivable by the end of the book.

I guess it could be a unforgivable curse but jk rowling hasnt considered it one, but like we dont know for sure if there is a counter-curse or not because no one has really looked into it and jk rowling hasnt said it herself.

I don't think it will be an unforgivable curse. Maybe just very dark magic. It doesn't have a clear purpose unlike the cruciatus which is for pain, and AK which is for death. The sectumsempra is something that can be blocked and healed right away.

We don't know if it can be blocked. Now if your thinking of when Snape wiped his wand when Harry tried doing that, well it was not really a block, Snape made Harry fly through the air so he could not finish the spell, Now that is completely differnt.

True, we dont know if Sectumsempra can be blocked but we do know the damage it causes. It slashes and causes gashes in a person to bleed freely. To me, when I hear bleed freely, I think of bleeding that is hard to stop or contain. This is certainly Dark Curse.

I don't know about unforgivable. Like many have pointed out, it does have a counter curse. If someone knows the counter curse and performs it in a timely manner, the person could be saved as demonstrated with Draco and Snape in HBP.

To my knowledge the 3 Unforgivable curses do not have counter curses.
Imperio can be fought or resisted but it is a rarity that someone can do that. Also the curse has already been performed on a person.
If you are hit by Crucio you are tortured and when you are tortured you dont mutter countercurses.
And well, Avada Kedavera...you die. True Harry used Expelliarmus on Voldemort in GoF but I honestly think the only reason that worked was because of Priori Incantatum when the wands connected becuase they share the same core.

There is much more Dark Magic out there and not all of it is classified as unforgivable. I looked up on the Lexicon website *sorry* and they described a curse that turned someone's insides out...particularly nasty but not classified as unforgivable. I think this is where Sectumsepra falls

i totally think that sectumsempra should be an unforgivable curse. thats what i first thought when i read that chapter. it should be because well if you use it, the victim will probably bleed to death (unless snape comes running in) so it's kind of a variation of avada kedavra.

i think sectumsempra will not make it into the category under the unforgivable curse. although it causes someone to bleed incessantly, but it was only to be considered dark magic. there are a lot more similar curses like sectumsempra, like the fiendfyre curse, the effects were the same, they were deadly.

I don't think it counts as an Unforgivable Curse, as nevillesgirl said, it certainly is Dark Magic, but it has a counter curse and dittany.
The counter curse is to be performed by an accomplished wizard, and if there isn't one arround, perhaps the person hit by the curse would bleed to death. Molly Weasley said (DH chapter 5) that these kind of spells-dark spells- cannot be grown by magic.
I think that those 3 curses are "unforgivable" - avada kedavra, cruciatus curse, imperius curse- because they don't give an alternative to the victim. Besides, there's no doubt that if you use them you mean to cause harm to your opponent. There is no room for thinking otherwise.
What I mean by this is that we haven't heard of "Sectumsempra" until HBP, and if it were to be so fatal, so "unforgibable", it should have been included then or in the beginning of the series.
I think that if Harry knew what sectumsempra means, he wouldn't have used it not even against Malfoy, I came across this and I think its very interesting:

Sectumsempra = sek-tum-sem-pra
"sectus" Latin past participle of "seco" (=dry, in spanish), to cut "sempra" latin "always"

Snape cast this spell at the wand hand of a Death Eater who had been aming at Remus Lupin's back, but missed and hit George Weasley instead, removing one of his ears. And he might have used it (non-verbally) against James Potter that resulted in a gash across his face after the DADA O.W.L., judging for Snape's remarks when departing from Hogwarts in HBP.

So I guess that the damage it makes depends where you aim at.

I think it should a Unforgivable curse for these reasons:

I could kill someone and unlike avada kedavra, it's a slow and painful kind of death.
You can die from loss of blood
and you can't protect yourself from it either.

True, it can make you die, as Snape said that Draco could have died if he had gotten there later, but the same could be said of any curse. If you are on a broom and someone stuns you, you would fall off and granted you are high enough, you could die. Casting Diffendo at someone's through could make someone die.

I think what makes the three Unforgivables so 'unforgivable' is the fact that there is no countercurse for them so you adversary has no means of defending himself. They also are nasty spells themselves but the fact that they can't be blocked makes them that much nastier. We don't know if Sectumsempra can be blocked or not, but we do know that the effects of it can be taken care of and healed, which cannot be said for Crucio (Neville's parents will never be cured) or Avada Kedavra.

There is no doubt though that it is a Dark curse. It is a horrible curse, but that made me think: surely there must be a lot more Dark curses,. where would the Death Eaters get all their Dark Magic from? There must be other Dark spells similar to this, and they are not Unforgivables. Which makes me think that it would not be an Unforgivable curse.

With there only being three Unforgivable curses, would that make the use of any other curses not punishable by law? We don't know much about Wizarding law, but I think that if you do any kind of harm to another person like the kind of harm Sectumsempra can do to you then that should be punishable by law. So I think that although it may not be an Unforgivable curse, the use of it would not be taken lightly.

Now if Sectumsempra is being used to kill and mame then yes it's definatly a horrible curse but does it only work against humans/animals....can it be used for more helpful purposes, cutting wood, rope, slicing through thick brush. It could come in hand in a non violent way...just a thought.

Personally, I think Sectumsempra is an evil curse, but it cannot be classified as Unforgivable. As nevillesgirl says, there are other curses, such as the effects of which are also much painful and damaging to the body and they are not among the Unforgivables either. Even less harmless curses can cause death. As in DH Harry says,

It's true that we are not much familiar with the wizarding law, but I suppose it can be paralleled to the human legal system. There are some crimes for which people are sent to prison, but then there are others, though causing pain and damage, for which people are punished in some more lenient ways. And I would say, despite its effects, Sectumsempra falls into the category of lenient punishment. Someone has mentioned the difference between Unforgivable and illegal curses. The use of an Unforgivable sends you straight off to Azkaban, whereas if you cause damage by an illegal curse, in other words by Dark Magic, you are subject to hearings and can be punished in some other way. How does that sound?

The two most important arguments in the discussion so far are the following:
Irreversibility
In HBP we learn that Professor Snape

This definitely shows that the curse's effects are reversible.

But then on the other hand, in DH


In other words, the effects are curable, we know that there is an incantation and even maybe a potion or something else from dittany, but the cure is effective only to a certain extent. Sectumsempra is a Dark Magic curse and effects of these tend to be permanent.

Block-ability
Some of you said that we don't know whether it can be blocked but I think it can be seen in "Flight of the Prince"
Professor Snape must have performed a non-verbal spell and flicking his wand blocked the curse. Although other wizards might not know the blocking curse, it evidently exists as Professor Snape uses it. If ever Sectumsempra was to spread among the public I think the blocking curse would become known too.

In conclusion, I would say that Sectumsempra bears similarities to the Unforgivables in that it leaves permanent marks. It differs in that its effects can be cured and it also can be blocked by a certain curse/spell. It can be said that Imperio can be blocked too but not by a spell but only by the strength of one’s mind. If you want to block Sectumsempra, it's only about learning the proper blocking curse, which anyone can do, but for blocking Imperio, you must be really a powerful wizard with a strong mind which is not everyone.

So no, I don't think Sectumsempra can ever be counted among the Unforgivables.

~Jana

You know I was just thinking of something. Bellatrix in OOTP says something like "Never used an Unforgivable Curse before," she was talking to Harry by the way..."You have to really mean it."

When Harry says the incantation for Sectumsempra...he just blurts it out. He knows it is used on an enemy but it's not like he had to really concentrate on it to make it effective. He just spoke the words and wham!!! Draco was hit. I figure that Unforgivable Curses require a person to concentrate on really meaning it to damage or kill the intended target.

Harry was obviously remorseful after he hit Draco with that curse. He would never have even used it on him if he had known what it would have done to him. Post HBP possibly but certainly not before.

OK to stop this fight
Sectumsempra could be a curse but why wasn't Snape been sent to Azakabn for using it against the snake at the dual in the Chamber of Secrets???