Starting in the 1970s, a series of important scholars have studied the influence that theosophy and anthroposophy had on the great names of modern art (Piet Mondrian, Wassily Kandinsky, Hilma af Klint, and others). Since then, this topic has been carefully researched in several landmark works written mainly by Sixten Ringbom, Rose Carol Washton-Long, Roger Lipsey, Massimo Introvigne, Tessel M. Bauduin, and others, who have documented esoteric and occult influences in the genesis of modern abstract art. The primary objective for Kandinsky, Klee, and Mondrian was to explore the profound properties of matter in order to uncover the timeless and unchanging substance of reality. Similar to Van Gogh and Mondrian, Kandinsky acknowledged himself as a contemporary of a genuine spiritual revolution, a pivotal moment in human history. On the other hand, prestigious authors such as René Guénon or Mircea Eliade criticized in rather harsh terms the theosophical movement, which they saw as a form of popularizing traditional metaphysical or esoteric knowledge. In my presentation, I would like to outline some questions that derive from this issue: if the theosophical movement was one lacking a metaphysical foundation, why was its impact so strong in the genesis of modern abstract art? Why were Kandinsky and the others mistaken when they believed that the revolution in art would have an equivalent to a spiritual revolution among other people? Can modern abstract art be interpreted through the prism of theosophical works or would it be more appropriate to start from the ideas that Guénon, Coomaraswamy and Eliade had about the relationship between art and the sacred, about the principles of traditional art? What relationships can be established between modern abstract art and traditional art, in an esoteric sense? Can the sacred be contemplated in a modern work of art, even though much of the criticism denies such connections between the two?