In the field of art studies, the two principal methods of researchers are historicism and phenomenology. The first method belongs to art historians, and the second method is the approach of traditionalists in the broad sense or esotericists, including the proponents of the Perennial Philosophy and also mystical interpreters, in confronting the artwork. In the study of Persian miniature painting, without a case study, relying solely on issuing general judgments about the two methods in question has sometimes led to the expression of unreliable opinions or caused disputes and a tendency to eliminate one approach in favor of the other, whereas each one views the artwork from a specific perspective. In this comparative study, when confronting a specific artwork, the impact of the audience's approach on the type of their perception is examined. For this purpose, as a case study, the miniature Yusuf Fleeing from Zuleikha, by Kamal al-Din Bihzad, is analyzed and interpreted from the perspective of historicists and mystical interpreters, including "Traditionalists" in the specific sense or the proponents of the Perennial Philosophy. This miniature belongs to the Timurid period, which is considered one of the peaks in the history of Persian miniature painting. In this period, mystical literature also flourished. Regarding what kind of intellectual and practical inclination Bihzad, as a court library painter, possessed, one cannot reach a definitive opinion; however, this work, as a narrator of a sacred text accompanied by mystical and ethical poetry, besides its aesthetic and stylistic aspects, has the capacity for esoteric interpretation. Instances of each of these two categories under discussion (the sensory and the suprasensory aspects) are indicated with several examples — such as the figures, forms, colors, the staircase of the building, and the seven doors of the chambers. For example, in the historicist perspective, the artist's manner of scientific application of color within the composition is considered, whereas in the mystical approach, each color represents a meaning. The present research is of a theoretical type, conducted through a descriptive-analytical method by gathering library resources. In this research, by studying the aforementioned miniature from both methods, it becomes clear how the interpretation of an audience with a mystical or traditionalist approach attributes an exemplary function to the artist's imaginal forms and places them as an isthmus and a bridge between form and meaning, whereas in the historicist approach, the analysis of the apparent components of the work merely represents a beautiful form of the intended narrative. In any case, regarding the manner in which an artwork is formed, one cannot opine with certainty; in other words, it might not be possible to documentarily call a miniaturist a mystic or his imagery a depiction of the imaginal world, however, it can be said that the mode of reading a work like this miniature, irrespective of its creator's intention, directs the audience's reception of it and invites them to an outward and aesthetic journey or an inward journey through the degrees of their existence.