This commentary proposes that the decision to hold findings from te ao Māori and biomedicine in productive tension—rather than resolving them into a single integrated account—is not a methodological preference but a constitutional obligation grounded in the te reo text of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Drawing on the ontological turn in research methodology and on recent Waitangi Tribunal findings, the commentary argues that the two texts of the Treaty/Tiriti constitute two different worlds of reality: the English-language version enacting a hierarchical transfer of sovereignty; the te reo text enacting complementary, coequal spheres of kāwanatanga and tino rangatiratanga. Since tino rangatiratanga in Article Two extends to all taonga, including mātauranga Māori, the absorption of Māori health knowledge into dominant biomedical or social science frameworks without consent is constitutionally unsound. Composition—the practice of holding multiple worlds of reality in structured relation without reducing one to another—is proposed as the methodologically and constitutionally appropriate alternative.