‘Vision, or imagination,’ writes Blake, ‘is a representation of what actually exists, really and unchangeably. Fable, or allegory, is formed by the daughters of Memory.’  A vision is a perception of the eternal symbols, about which the world is formed, while allegory is a memory of some natural event into which we read a spiritual meaning. In vision the meaning chooses its own symbol by a kind of affinity, while in the case of allegory we choose out some corporeal accident, and build into our memory of it a little vision, because allegory, according to Blake, contains ‘some vision’ always, and lifts it up into a personification of a spiritual or natural meaning.
WWB 1 307

If 'allegory' always contains 'some vision', then the roots of allegory  (into which we read a spiritual meaning) IS 'vision'.      pimoebius

William Blake expressed that allegory has at it's roots the faculty of  'vision or imagination' because  ".... allegory, contains 'some vision' always and lifts it up into a personification of a spiritual or natural meaning." 

Psychiatry has moved far away from the point when Sigmund Freud  wrote it down. C. G. Jung's breakthrough was to recognize that a process of human individuation exists and that a certain pattern is  'inherent' in man: "my work has scientifically proved that the pattern of God exists in every man and that this pattern has at it's disposal the greatest transforming energy of which mankind is capable.

In the late 1970's a process of personalization as well as very great depersonalization  was initiated in my life through a 'bond' that has been experienced without my knowing it existed, in the literal man, men that I actually knew and had known. In 1984 I had an event occur in my mind that told me about my own life. It began with a memory that I'd forgotten about but it was retrieved in every detail, including a thought I'd had that day, but never mentioned to anyone and as I wrote, I'd forgotten it myself. In the next  5 years I was gripped by a 'drive' that motivated me basically, to try to understand what was happening  in my mind, and primarily to prove to a real person that I  wasn't 'crazy'.

The masculine gender has a different history, in fact history is his story. The pattern itself that man has experienced has a real extension in Time, moving through generations. It has a signal like attribute if that extension and duration is identified.  I want to identify that attribute, it is important.

The pattern is one that I had noticed when I  was a young girl, but that fact is not possible to understand from only seeing and hearing a person that's  gripped by the pattern and is experiencing the process itself.  It was old when Plato wrote The Cave Allegory but I'd not read Plato or known about  his allegory in 1984. That's close to the point in Time when I began to notice small details in my life that I could have noticed but had not. My attention was drawn to those small details and only then did I wonder why I'd not noticed them in the past.  

The process that I experienced  began to set up a basis for discovering it, and naming it  when I was very young. After 1984 I felt driven to do just what Adam in Genesis 1 had to do, 'name what was brought before him' because I felt a real motor-like urge to name everything that was brought before me. And what was needing to be described then was not an object but some 'thing' that was in itself invisible except through some material world scene whether 'it' was using a certain specific circumstance, situation, condition, characteristic, attribute, aspect or person or any object that uses words. That was a mindboggling change, when objects that use words began to seem to talk to me.

 I had no words to describe an 'attribute' for instance, even when I read William Blake and the Tree of Life by Laura de witt James in which book, the word 'attribute' is often  written.

Although toddlers are probably driven by the same 'urge', to name things, describe what they see! I'm just a typical female, I had no promptings to try to understand the meaning of life, why we are here, what life is all about until a sprinkling of unusual events happened in my real life and I barely noticed them when they happened.

Within 5 years after 1984, it seemed the planet had a voice. It seemed to have begun to speak, using whatever was available in my life. It took a few years to begin to feel I was being 'talked to' in and from the process that had begun in my mind. It eventually created what I named a 'second underlying context' to words I heard and events I experienced in my every day life. I had no idea that such experiences are defined in psychiatric texts as 'delusional associations' because they are 'subjective' . That means they are not verifiable by scientific process or the consensually validated belief!  I can cite two sources for how the 'second underlying context' was described  by Theodore Reik  as 'magical thinking' and a different one written  by Sigmund Freud when he attempted to rationalize a 'paranormal' event that had happened between him and Carl G. Jung.

The personalization of every day events to the degree that a kind of communication about one's very specific life is experienced, but only one aspect is that information that this one person didn't know originally has been conveyed through it, rules out the scientific method as a means to prove and verify anything so uniquely 'my experience'. 

When a mode of communication is such that it moves steadily through generations of individual lives, over a span of time that is measured in decades, centuries and millenniums rather than hours or minutes, the 'signal like' attribute of that mode of communication may be impossible to detect by 'normal' methods of study.

It has been my experience to witness the use of memories that were so uniquely mine as well as a  few events that happened  when I was a young girl to inform me in a specific way that on this planet I was not alone when those memories were 'installed'. C. J. Jung had many 'visions' when he was young that could not have made sense to him until they were used, later in his life. I've never had what I could think of as a vision, I've had masses of information and memories from my past retrieved in a movie like display.

"Gott würfelt nicht (God does not play dice)"  Albert Einstein  remarked when a flaw in his ideas was pointed out to him.   It seems to me, from experiences of my own, that 'God' does gamble, does take risks, does even play a kind of 'game' in Time,  so that at some point in Time, "It's" mode of communication will be distinct and understood by all who receive it. This was written in Jeremiah, that the time would come when 'all shall know that I AM God', and no man will need to say to another, that there is a God.

William Blake and Emanuel Swedenborg are two individuals who wrote that they were merely 'secretaries' , the hand that  wrote what they received.  Swedenborg did not write poetry; he did not use parables, metaphor, allegory, myths, or fable: he explained how to understand  the Bible  as 'representations' of history and  psychologically conveyed information!!  

Any individual into whose very mundane daily life is 'sprinkled' at first, and then eventually flooded with a 'new (to me) kind of event' that generates an unpleasant body response, a sense of mental confusion, may in my opinion, be driven to do exactly what God asked Adam to do: "Name what you see, describe what you see."