When contemporary researchers explain the theory of the Buddha-Nature claimed by Zhu Tao-Sheng, they often hold their own sides. Some people think that the possession of Buddha-Nature is inherent, and some think it is due. Are the two opinions really opposite? Or are they actually coherent? This paper attempts to return to Zhu Tao-Sheng's commentary to answer this question. The Zhu Tao-Sheng's theory of Buddha-Nature is based on the causal Buddha-Nature view of the Mahāparinirvāṇ a-sūtra, and therefore the four forms of Buddha-Nature are also explained under this framework. In the four Buddha-Nature forms, the so-called ＂Inherent Possession＂ system corresponds to ＂the twelve limbs of dependent origination and its principle of dharma＂, which belongs to ＂Cause of the Buddha-Nature＂ position. Moreover, this framework also suggests that the inherently possessed Buddha-Nature is a self-sufficient and permanent existence of human beings. The so-called ＂Due Possession＂ corresponds to the Buddha result of the position of ＂Effect of the Buddha-Nature＂, which would only be obtained and arise after human beings ＂come to understand twelve limbs of dependent origination with wisdom＂. As for the very first time that human beings understand the principle of dharma and realize that the reality of the object is in harmony with the subjective understanding, Zhu Tao-Sheng calls it ＂dawn＂, which evokes the conversion of human beings from ＂Inherent Possession＂ to ＂Due Possession＂. As a result, there is no conflict or contradiction between the concepts of ＂Inherent Possession＂ and ＂Due Possession＂, according to Zhu Tao-Sheng's Buddha-Nature theory. Instead, they can be synthesized into a whole system under this framework.
