明清因明詮釋與印度原典之間不但存在著印漢之間的語言文化差異，更受漢傳因明傳承中斷的影響，產生了空間及時間的雙重隔閡。這些隔閡導致了明清因明學者們的諸多誤讀。例如，在喻支詮釋中，明清學者未能理解陳那理論的原本結構，也未正確繼承唐代因明「喻體」、「喻依」等概念，甚至將異喻理解成另外樹立的相反論式。他們取消了合離表述的邏輯意義，反加諸其上修辭層面的作用，使喻支僅以喻例提供類比。然而，本文認為，這些誤讀並非毫無意義，而是在一定程度上自成一體，展現了明清因明學者面對陌生原典時的理論建構努力。明清學者藉由其獨特詮釋，重塑了因明理論，將印度因明進一步本土化，其誤讀實際上與創新並不違背，是跨文化傳播的典型案例。

There were not only linguistic and cultural differences between the interpretations of Buddhist logic in Ming-Qing period and their Indian original, but also the interruption of the Chinese tradition itself. A double gap in both space and time was so created, which had led to many misreadings by Ming-Qing scholars on Buddhist logic. For instance, in their interpretations of the example member, Ming-Qing scholars failed to understand the original structure of Dignāga’s theory or inherit correctly the concepts of “essence” and “substratum” of the example member from Tang Buddhist logic, and even regarded the dissimilar example as a separate and contrasting argument. They removed the logical significance from the example statements, but applied a rhetorical interpretation, thus making the example member merely serve as an analogy by instances. However, such misreadings are not meaningless but to a certain extent self-contained, showing the theoretical construction efforts of Ming-Qing scholars in the face of unfamiliar texts. Through their particular interpretations, Ming-Qing scholars reconstructed the theories of Buddhist logic, and thus further localized Indian Buddhist logic. Therefore, their misreadings are actually not contrary to innovation, but presenting a typical case of transcultural communication.