What clasifies a rahi?

[boston100]

On earth we say any living thing, (exept aliens) wich are not humans are animals. I was wondering what classified a rahi as a rahi? As there are countless species on bara magna and the matoran universe this has always puzzeled me. For example the Artakah bull is very intelegient, more so the the skakdi but it is classified as a rahi! that always confused me.

[Relapse]

On earth we say any living thing, (exept aliens) wich are not humans are animals. I was wondering what classified a rahi as a rahi? As there are countless species on bara magna and the matoran universe this has always puzzeled me. For example the Artakah bull is very intelegient, more so the the skakdi but it is classified as a rahi! that always confused me.

 

Your first point is not necessarily true. There are Protozoans, and Bacteria, and some other stuff.

 

I believe "Rahi" means "not us" so in this situation it could technically mean any non-sentient organism in the MU

[Van Hohenheim]

from BS01..

 

 

 

Rahi are generally classified with a lower intellect than theSapient Species of the universe, acting primarily on instinct and out of a desire for basic needs such as food and shelter. They contain very little inner Light; enough to be drained, but not enough to have an effect on their judgment.

[<Reverb>]

Rahi are fauna, compared to the animals of our world, Earth. The definition of a "rahi" from BS01:

 

 

Rahi are the fauna of the Matoran Universe, biomechanical creatures composed of organic and inorganic Protodermis.

 

 

The main aspect of rahi is that they are generally most of the time of lower intellect, compared to Sapient Species, such as matoran. (Exceptions include the Artakha Bull.) The definition of Sapient Species from BS01:

 

 

The characters in the BIONICLE storyline belong to different Sapient Species. Each sapient species has their own individuality and culture, and are capable of communicating with each other and performing tasks fluently and with independent thought, unlike Creatures or Rahi.

 

Also, the main difference between "Creatures" and "Rahi" is stated here from BS01:

 

 

Creatures are non-sapient organisms, of which all known specimens are native to Spherus Magna. They each have some form of organic composition, varying from being partially biomechanical to the entirety. Creatures that inhabit the Matoran Universe are falsely regarded as Rahi, despite their foreign origin. Those Creatures that do have a bone structure possess a metallic one.

 

The Artakha Bull, as you said is highly intelligent, but is still classified as a rahi I believe because they were created by the Makuta by combining viruses and liquid protodermis.

[Mehul]

I believe "Rahi" means "not us" so in this situation it could technically mean any non-sentient organism in the MU

 

 

However rahi have been shown or implied to be sentient, examples being the arthaka bull, the tahtorak, Krahka and arguably the flying rahi who have a language of their own. I think a better but perhaps obtuse way of defining rahi whilst using the "not us" root would be to call them completely neutral entities that don't have any specific allegiances.

 

Since Rahi is a MU word I dont think the BM fauna could be classified as rahi

[<Reverb>]

 

Since Rahi is a MU word I dont think the BM fauna could be classified as rahi

 

 

They're classified as creatures, not rahi I believe.

Edited June 26, 2013 by Phantomesque

[Spicy Salmon Samurai]

 

I believe "Rahi" means "not us" so in this situation it could technically mean any non-sentient organism in the MU

 

 

However rahi have been shown or implied to be sentient, examples being the arthaka bull, the tahtorak, Krahka and arguably the flying rahi who have a language of their own. I think a better but perhaps obtuse way of defining rahi whilst using the "not us" root would be to call them completely neutral entities that don't have any specific allegiances.

 

Since Rahi is a MU word I dont think the BM fauna could be classified as rahi

 

The Arthaka Bull, Tahtorak, Krahka, (and let's not forget Keetongu) are all technically classified as Rahi, despite their high intelligence. Although Rahi means 'not us', it is technically ok to call them that, but it is a different kind of 'not us' than would be assigned to an 'animal Rahi'.

 

Like, these specific Rahi are not like the Matoran and may be smarter in some cases, but the other Rahi are not like the Matoran because they are wild and non-sapient. If you know what I'm saying.

[slifer3000]

On earth we say any living thing, (exept aliens) wich are not humans are animals. I was wondering what classified a rahi as a rahi? As there are countless species on bara magna and the matoran universe this has always puzzeled me. For example the Artakah bull is very intelegient, more so the the skakdi but it is classified as a rahi! that always confused me.

 

BioSector says that the Bahrag and Krana are classified as Rahi by the Matoran, even though they are NOT Rahi. Which means that there are no basic defined categories in which the object needs to fit to be a Rahi, unlike our classification of animals.

[alpha123]

I consider 'Rahi' any living thing not made by the Great Beings or Mata Nui. This is all the Makuta creations, including sapient ones like Krahka and Keetongu. The lines get a little blurred however - Krana are classified perhaps wrongly as Rahi, but I don't believe Kraata are considered Rahi and they are created by Makuta.

[Mehul]

I consider 'Rahi' any living thing not made by the Great Beings or Mata Nui. This is all the Makuta creations, including sapient ones like Krahka and Keetongu. The lines get a little blurred however - Krana are classified perhaps wrongly as Rahi, but I don't believe Kraata are considered Rahi and they are created by Makuta.

 

There's a problem with that assumption though- not all rahi were makuta created. Apparently a few were made by the GBs and according to BS01 these predated the Makuta!

Edited June 26, 2013 by Mehul

[alpha123]

There's a problem with that assumption though- not all rahi were makuta created. Apparently a few were made by the GBs and according to BS01 these predated the Makuta!

Ah right, I forgot Mavrah's Rahi. Arg, that's annoying. I guess it's really whatever Matoran deem a Rahi then - frankly I find Keetongu less Rahi-like than the Skakdi.

Edited June 26, 2013 by alpha123

[bonesiii]

BioSector says that the Bahrag and Krana are classified as Rahi by the Matoran, even though they are NOT Rahi. Which means that there are no basic defined categories in which the object needs to fit to be a Rahi, unlike our classification of animals.

Not necessarily. When it says "not Rahi" it presumably means according to the classification system of the Great Beings and/or Mata Nui. But under the Matoran's labeling scheme it's just a label, and it's somewhat subjective how to define words to slap labels on things. So you could think of it as two separate classification systems; the GBs' and the Matoran's.

 

 

 

There's a problem with that assumption though- not all rahi were makuta created. Apparently a few were made by the GBs and according to BS01 these predated the Makuta!

Ah right, I forgot Mavrah's Rahi. Arg, that's annoying. I guess it's really whatever Matoran deem a Rahi then - frankly I find Keetongu less Rahi-like than the Skakdi.

This is where the (rather cool) strategy of simple rules that imply all you need to know come in, if you think it through hard enough (like the Toa Code's simplicity). Bionicle seems to do this a lot -- in this case, "not us" probably means "not groups we regularly communicate and trade with as if they were like Matoran -- or used to".

 

The Skakdi used to be a peaceful species and they (can) speak Matoran, and presumably used to trade often with the Matoran prior to Spiriah's tampering. So even though they became violent later, the Matoran still thought of them as naturally part of "us" (or so I think).

 

But Keetongu's species was both created by Makuta (unlike the Skakdi) and lived so far south they were probably never engaged in regular communnication or trade with Matoran, so they probably had less trouble thinking of them as Rahi. (Disclaimer: I'm short on time now to check whether it was stated that the Matoran call them that or not; correct if they didn't.)

[DuplexBeGreat]

We can sort of have two definitions of Rahi- the official definition, encompassing all those that actually are Rahi, and the Matoran definition, based on their knowledge and opinions.Regarding Keetongu, his species's status of being made by the Makuta does mean that there is at least a basis for classifying them as Rahi, a starting point where someone, real or fictional, first got the idea from, even if the species aren't Rahi in the end. Also, some of Keetongu's actions at the climax of WoS are somewhat bestial- his single-minded determination to take down Roodaka and Sidorak, being hit by Roodaka's attacks and falling only made him angrier, he killed Sidorak without a second thought even though Sidorak hadn't even hurt him yet at all, etc- these kinda show that he does act like an animal at times, so the Rahi classification isn't entirely unjustified even if the definition is slightly off of what it should be.

[Mehul]

 

 

This is where the (rather cool) strategy of simple rules that imply all you need to know come in, if you think it through hard enough (like the Toa Code's simplicity). Bionicle seems to do this a lot -- in this case, "not us" probably means "not groups we regularly communicate and trade with as if they were like Matoran -- or used to".

 

This echoes my thoughts when I said that the rahi are completely neutral beings, they don't partake in trade or the economy of the MU and don't wage wars on their own account.

[The Legendary TNT]

 

 

 

This is where the (rather cool) strategy of simple rules that imply all you need to know come in, if you think it through hard enough (like the Toa Code's simplicity). Bionicle seems to do this a lot -- in this case, "not us" probably means "not groups we regularly communicate and trade with as if they were like Matoran -- or used to".

 

This echoes my thoughts when I said that the rahi are completely neutral beings, they don't partake in trade or the economy of the MU and don't wage wars on their own account.

 

So, just because they didn't trade with it, does that make the Krahka a Rahi?

[Mehul]

So, just because they didn't trade with it, does that make the Krahka a Rahi?

 

According to the official rahi guide, Krahka is a rahi. The trading part helps expain this classification since it is intelligent but was not part of what matoran society deemed "us".

[The Legendary TNT]

 

So, just because they didn't trade with it, does that make the Krahka a Rahi?

 

According to the official rahi guide, Krahka is a rahi. The trading part helps expain this classification since it is intelligent but was not part of what matoran society deemed "us".

 

Yeah, but it learned the language and seemed to be intelligent enough to be more than just a Rahi.

[Mehul]

 

 

Yeah, but it learned the language and seemed to be intelligent enough to be more than just a Rahi.

 

You realise not just the Krahka but the Arthaka Bull, Tahtorak, Keetongu and others have been shown to or implied understand the matoran language and have at times even spoken it. In as of the keetongu, Krahka and arthaka bull these rahi seem to have at the very least intelligence on par with matoran if not more.

 

Indeed the whole point of the topic seems to me is that it is hard to find a good way define what a rahi is and isn't due several exceptions.

[fishers64]

A Matoran. In the Archives. :PWhich is probably part of the answer. If you can put it in a stasis tube or a vault, it's a Rahi. If you can ride it, it's a Rahi. If you are more intelligent than it and it is subservient to you (or Makuta), and isn't obviously a machine, it's a Rahi.

Edited June 27, 2013 by fishers64

[bonesiii]

 

 

So, just because they didn't trade with it, does that make the Krahka a Rahi?

 

According to the official rahi guide, Krahka is a rahi. The trading part helps expain this classification since it is intelligent but was not part of what matoran society deemed "us".

 

Yeah, but it learned the language and seemed to be intelligent enough to be more than just a Rahi.

But again, the definition of the term we were given was "not us", so (at least as far as the Matoran go), Krahka is still thought of as a Rahi. Perhaps even more so because they're aware that it started out as unintelligent goo.

 

BTW, I wonder in either classification system, would anything made by a Makuta be considered a Rahi regardless of intelligence? Or maybe if the Matoran heard about it, they would do this while the GBs might not? I seem to recall the Visorak being said to be not really Rahi in terms of intelligence (you can tell how dependent you are on BS01 by how you react when it goes down ), yet they were made by Makuta.

 

Re: Keetongu -- maybe because they were designed to be expert healers the Makuta publicized the fact that they were making them, originally, and the Matoran heard about it and thought "made by Makuta = Rahi"?

 

This might work similarly to my theory about the origin of Exo-Toa if yall saw that in another current topic. It would explain everything about the species. It would explain why they're called Rahi despite their intelligence, and why they were made -- to improve the Brotherhood's public image via reputation -- but also why they were put far to the south, out of easy reach of the majority of the population, so that their healing skills couldn't actually come into play much to help out the Brotherhood's enemies. That would also explain why the Matoran were still aware of them yet it was more of an ancient legend seemingly, plus why the Makuta tried to wipe them all out.

 

Anywho, more food for thought.

[Mehul]

Wait, so are you suggesting that among the reasons the makuta created rahi was to improve PR. That would be amazing if the story team had thought of that

 

So to summarise Rahi are non-trading entities of the MU that can be archived, created by Makuta and Great Beings who may have used some of the time as a PR campaign.

 

Simple really.

[fishers64]

Visorak are Rahi, according to BS01: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:7GK9gliL-NAJ:biosector01.com/wiki/index.php/Visorak_(Rahi)+&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

 

 

 

The Visorak are spider-like Rahi that once made up a large portion of the Brotherhood of Makuta's army.

 

So I suppose the theory has merit.

[Just A Dot]

Greg Farshtey does, if I'm not mistaken.

[LewaLew]

Too lazy right now to read the entire topic, but I was under the impression that a Rahi was any wildlife developed by Makuta. Hence why the Krana and Bahrag, creations of the GB's or Mata Nui (I can't remember for sure) aren't Rahi, but highly intelligent creatures like Keetongu and Krahka are Rahi.

[Omega12]

I think you're correct with that, as skakdi are created by Mata Nui and not Rahi.

Edited July 8, 2013 by Omega12

[man774]

 

 

The Artakha Bull, as you said is highly intelligent, but is still classified as a rahi I believe because they were created by the Makuta by combining viruses and liquid protodermis.

It seems to me that this is enough to classify rahi. If a makuta made it, it's a rahi. Since the GB's created the matoran and other sapient species, wouldn't it make sense that "not us" would be life forms created by different means and/or a different source?

 

Something else to think about:

A lot of talk has to do with intelligence being a factor, and briniging up "sentient" rahi (tahtorak, krahka, artahkah, keetonghu) (there sure are a lot of H's and K's in bionicle, isn't there?). Maybe these rahi are the protists of the bionicle world?

Edited July 10, 2013 by man774

[bonesiii]

It seems to me that this is enough to classify rahi. If a makuta made it, it's a rahi. Since the GB's created the matoran and other sapient species, wouldn't it make sense that "not us" would be life forms created by different means and/or a different source?

The GBs also made the First Rahi. And I'm pretty sure, like I mentioned, Greg said that the Matoran consider some things Rahi that "aren't" (but by whose definition they aren't is unclear). I think the Bahrag were one of those. (So in those cases it depends on who in the MU you would ask.)

 

So no, it's not enough.

 

But I think that if a being was made by a Makuta, that's enough to know that that being is a Rahi. I think... If a being was not made by a Makuta, that is not enough to decide whether it's a Rahi.

[DuplexBeGreat]

And I'm pretty sure, like I mentioned, Greg said that the Matoran consider some things Rahi that "aren't" (but by whose definition they aren't is unclear).

I almost commented that it would be the "official" definition of nature, that is, there is a real definition of Rahi, something that all these creatures definitively have in common according to the laws of the universe... But then I remembered that that definition doesn't exist. Come to think of it, for what species other than the Matoran is there a possibility of them having any sort of collection of knowledge that would result in them having their own definition of Rahi? Are there any candidates at all?

[bonesiii]

The Order and the Makuta, for starters. And Mata Nui (but he didn't pay much attention). And originally the GBs.

 

The GBs probably still have their own definition in mind that they would still apply today if they could see every type of being that came into existence there later.

[weaselcookie321]

Well, I think anything could be classified as a rahi as long as it can be controlled by Kualus's "mask of rahi control", which was given to him as a badge of honor while serving as a bodyguard for Teridax.

[25K Now!]

Would Kualus' mask affect Keetongu or other near-sapient Rahi?

 

I'd assume that the Matoran would consider anything that isn't sapient, bipedal or Matoranoid-esque to be Rahi. Keetongu and Krahka may be bipedal and sapient, but I doubt most Matoran would have known of their species' actual sapience.

[man774]

 

 

I'd assume that the Matoran would consider anything that isn't sapient, bipedal or Matoranoid-esque to be Rahi. Keetongu and Krahka may be bipedal and sapient, but I doubt most Matoran would have known of their species' actual sapience.

I think this brings up a new point: Is there a difference from how the matoran classify rahi and how we or species or groups with more knowledge on the matter would classify rahi? Zyglak aren't rahi, buy the matoran consider them to be.