Within the Buddha‑nature tradition, Tathāgatagarbha is often understood as an intrinsic pure mind temporarily obscured by defilements. This interpretation speaks of a fundamentally luminous, pure awareness present in all beings, veiled by adventitious afflictions. Awakening, from this perspective, is not the creation of something new but the unveiling of what has always been there. Certain Mahāyāna texts emphasize this ever‑present purity and portray liberation as the removal of obscurations so that this nature can fully manifest. In this way, Tathāgatagarbha functions as a powerful affirmation of the dignity and depth of every sentient being.

Another influential reading treats Tathāgatagarbha as a skillful means, a pedagogical device pointing toward emptiness and non‑self. Here, the language of “Buddha within” is not taken as describing a hidden entity, but as a positive, encouraging way of speaking about emptiness and the absence of any fixed, obstructive essence. This interpretation insists that Buddha‑nature is not a substantial self, but a way of expressing that nothing in experience is inherently closed off from awakening. The same move appears when Tathāgatagarbha is identified directly with emptiness or suchness: Buddha‑nature is then simply the ultimate nature of phenomena, understood as lack of inherent existence.

A further line of interpretation understands Tathāgatagarbha as potentiality or capacity, often linked with the notion of “lineage” or “disposition” for Buddhahood. Rather than a fully formed Buddha hidden inside, this view emphasizes an inherent suitability or dynamic possibility that can be cultivated through practice. It bridges more substantial readings and strictly non‑substantialist ones by affirming a real capacity without positing a permanent inner essence. Closely related is the idea of Tathāgatagarbha as the luminous, reflexive quality of mind itself: empty of inherent existence yet vividly cognizant, an inseparability of emptiness and clarity that contemplative traditions explore in depth.

There are also interpretations that take Tathāgatagarbha as a more positive description of ultimate reality, sometimes identified with the dharmakāya as an all‑pervading ground of enlightenment. In such readings, Buddha‑nature is spoken of as a universal principle or ultimate suchness endowed with awakened qualities, present in all beings and in some sense underlying all phenomena. At the same time, many scholastic traditions treat Tathāgatagarbha as a doctrinal bridge, harmonizing the radical insight of emptiness with a more affirmative vision of reality’s deepest nature. Across these perspectives, the spectrum runs from non‑reifying accounts that equate Buddha‑nature with emptiness and pure potential, to more substantive portrayals of a luminous ground, and the living inquiry lies in how each practitioner relates to these complementary ways of speaking.