From a psychological-scientific standpoint, the phenomenon of a 'vision' is very difficult to define and only in an imprecise manner at that. Certainly, it would be wrong to simply imply that Kirpal Singh only had a hallucination. Besides, hallucinations are not always necessarily something pathologic.

However, it is important that Kirpal Singh, as he confirmed himself, subsequently recognized, that it wasn't Guru Nanak he had seen at all.

Moreover, he was convinced later on, that he had already 'seen' his teacher, Sawan Singh, in the vision, long before he had ever physically met him. I believe the experience he had to be better described as a 'gaze - image' of his teacher. Furthermore, it wasn't identical features of the face in his 'vision' which led Kirpal Singh to recognize his teacher and mentor, nor was it the latter's turban or anything else physical.

It was rather the completely identical 'shining gaze', the SHINES, the 'imaginary signifier', which he related to the name Nanak. This is at least clear in a psychological sense, since the name Nanak had had a distinct musical, passionate ring to it in Kirpal Singh's ears ever since his early childhood days. The name itself already was an intensive SPEAKS which SHINEd out of the vision..

So, the whole 'vision' of Nanak was nothing other than a compact SHINES / SPEAKS (again written with a connecting / dividing stroke in the middle, as it is the most ideal and brief formula for Kirpal Singh's meditation as well as for psychoanalysis. In such a case, the drives to look and speak always have a combinatory effect, an uprise to the real, to the 'causal'.)

This is the reason why I compared, and contrasted, the successfully made artist's picture with the "vision" in illustration 5. The artist also offers more to the eye than daily routine, even though his depiction describes everyday life. Lacan says, that paintings are a trap-of-the-eye. We find ourselves charmed by the Shines of the artist's talent, and are captured by the picture's title.

All of this is undoubtedly a spiritual continuation through the world of visuality, of 'imaginary significants', in that the artist truly hits the pulse of life, and our own, thereby proving to be proficient.