各国法律中均有一些既是权利又是义务的规定，但学界对于这里的“义务”的性质有较大分歧。其实，此“义务”源自权利的内在限制，是权利所附的内在义务，因为权利理论中的利益论所指的利益最终是人格利益，意志论所说的意志应该是正当意志。人格利益和正当意志不仅是使他人负有一项义务的充分理由，也同时使权利人自身负有义务行使这项权利，前者产生外在义务，后者产生内在义务并形成对权利的限制。当这种内在义务被确定为法律义务后，就产生了权利义务复合的现象。内在义务曾经被古代思想家认真对待，但是，近代权利话语对外在义务的排挤导致了义务话语的式微，出现了只见权利，不见义务的现象，这掩盖了内在义务的应有之义，也使得权利义务之复合呈现出表面上的矛盾。

外在义务, 内在义务, 人格利益论, 正当意志论, 权利义务复合

There are some provisions that are both rights and obligations in the laws of various countries, but the academic community has great differences on the nature of “obligations” here. In fact, this “obligation”originates from the internal limitation of rights and is an internal obligation attached to rights, because the interests referred to in the theory of rights are ultimately the interests of personality, and the will referred to in the theory of will should be the legitimate will. Personality interests and justifiable will are not only sufficient reasons for others to bear an obligation, but also make the right holder himself obligated to exercise this right. The former creates external obligations, and the latter creates inherent obligations and restricts rights. When this kind of inherent obligation is determined as a legal obligation, the compound phenomenon of rights and obligations arises.

extrinsic obligation, inherent obligation, personality interest theory, legitimate will theory, phenomenon of compounding rights and obligations