Non-Being Without Derivation from Being

This paper fixes non-being within Kasei-Theory without deriving it from being. The paper does not attempt a historical reconstruction of nothingness, nor does it present a comparative interpretation of major traditions concerning nothingness, non-being, emptiness, or negative theology. Its aim is more restricted: it asks whether non-being must be derived from being. Non-being is not introduced as absence, negation, disappearance, failure, collapse, void, latency, impossibility, meaninglessness, Fuka, Ka-trace, unreadability, or exteriority. Non-being does not establish the absence of being, the negation of being, the disappearance of being, the failure of being, the collapse of being, or the latent return of being. Being is not treated as prior to non-being. Non-being is not treated as a derivative effect of being. Kasei is not introduced as a third term beside being and non-being, nor as a mediation, synthesis, ground, or higher unity. The denominator of Kasei is fixed only as the condition under which the distinction of being and non-being becomes readable without priority, derivation, dependence, or ontological grounding. This paper does not prove that non-being exists. It does not establish negative ontology, metaphysical nothingness, void, absence, or an exterior domain. It fixes only non-being without derivation from being.