There are people always challenge about the ‘Buddha nature’ (tathAgata-garba) which was derived from ‘Brahman’ of Hinduism. Some Buddhist scholars criticize it will make Buddhism brahmanlize and become one kind of substantialism. But I think ‘Buddha nature’ was a response to those critiques of negative or nihilistic Buddhism that never care about the usual living world and its value. But this response will be effective only by according it can solve the contradiction to ZUnyata—the basic principle of Buddhism. Tiantai Buddhism’s ‘Buddha nature of middle way’ raised the ‘comprehensive idea’ of Chinese Buddhism is an possible answer of that. But ‘comprehensive idea’ still has its crisis to desacralize Buddhism to lose its original purpose of ZAkyamuni just like someone had criticized. This paper tries to show the track of Tiantai Buddhism’s ‘Buddha nature of middle way’, which emerged from the traditional middle way thinking in Indian Buddhism, but added whose own special understanding of Mahayana canons, such as Mahaparinirvana sutra, sadarmapudrika sutra (Lotus sutra), VimalakIrti-nirdeZa sutra, etc.. Only by interpreting this concept correctly we can make judge fairly about whether it indeed solve the contradiction or not. And we may further quest for that non-abandon the cultural living world to abandon its illusion, its meaning and value of this proposition.
