Non-Being Without Derivation from Being

This paper fixes non-being within Kasei-Theory without deriving it from being. The paper does not ask what nothingness is. 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, the latent return of being, or meaninglessness. Being is not prior to non-being. Non-being is not derived from being. Kasei is not introduced as a third term beside being and non-being. Kasei does not mediate being and non-being, synthesize being and non-being, or ground being and non-being as ontological domains. 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 distinction does not establish ontology, negative ontology, metaphysical nothingness, void, absence, exterior domain, or explanatory closure. The paper further clarifies that what remains without derivation is not a remaining thing, substance, domain, void, transcendence, or ontological residue. What remains is the maintained non-conversion of the distinction in which being and non-being become readable without priority, derivation, dependence, or ontological grounding. This paper does not prove that non-being exists. It does not establish negative ontology. It does not establish metaphysical nothingness. It fixes only non-being without derivation from being.