Boog's Incognitive Cognition
(... or₁, How to be precisely and accurately Incomprehensible)
((... or₂, How to Use Numerous Words Where None Would Suffice))
(
the above refers to me btw!)
By the second line, you can see that it is not alive. Yet according to the first line, if it were alive the sun would kill it. The third line line reveals that there are billions of something that are alive inside of it.
I'm not aware of any living thing that would not be killed by the sun if the sun were in a fatal configuration (i.e. on the basis the same criteria of environment would kill most/all other living things).
The fact the sun's risk to life, and the difference between alive and dead, are the only specific commonality to the first two lines means I'm looking for a connection specific to both those two criteria.
As the sun would otherwise surely kill the billions contained within the [riddle answer], then the presence of it is acting to protect those billions within it despite conditions that would otherwise kill all living things.
Inclusion of the word 'yet' in the third line suggests:
'
despite the sun being fatal if [riddle answer] were alive, [riddle answer] is filled with billions of living entities'.
The [riddle answer] isn't physically removing it's contained billions of lives from the sphere of fatal influence of the sun, so presumably acts as a shield to the one or more attributes of the sun that would be unquestionably fatal.
Note:
(I'm not criticising the riddle (or not knowingly and/or deliberately), rather I'm trying to explain my minds reasoning process in the hope of a clue that fits that rather restricted and limiting method of pseudo-cogitation on my part!
)