Re: Response to Eiichi or "Brotherhood, Smotherhood"
Feb 12, 1998 00:37 AM
by Mark Kusek
>> Eichi wrote:
>> Dear Doss, Thoa and Members of TS,
>> I wonder whether we should retreat our arguments from this TS until we
>> get into more theosophical topics.
If anybody really obstinately gives you flack about this, just tell them
frankly where to stick the "Secret Doctrine." All this pompous
"Brotherhood" junk can easily get carried to the snottiest of extremes.
"Brotherhood" isn't worth a damn if you aren't willing to "accept the
least of these my brethren." Anything else, is just obnoxious posturing.
Don't be fooled.
> John Mead wrote:
> But the recent statements coming out in the official publications of TS in
> America are the ones which are causing concerns and have the greatest potential
> to attract people who may be mislead and join the TS. In this day of New
> Age many are interested in finding out hidden secrets of nature so that
> they can use them in their quest for health, wealth and happiness. Do we
> want this to happen? What is it going to do for the long term health of TS?
> These are the issues that need to be looked into.
For God's sake, how stable are we? Are we really floundering around,
blown by the winds of every disparate opinion to fear and doubt or do we
have the experience of BEING to ground us?
"People" are at every conceivable level of understanding. If we can't
receive them with open arms and deal with them where they are, then
we're not ready to be their brothers and sisters. A big part of true
human "brotherhood" is being able to stand together on the line and
appreciate things as they are: both good and bad, similar and different,
known and unknown. It's the lack of tolerance and mutual acceptance that
has caused all of the wars and misunderstandings up 'til now. You have
to be willing to admit to being a regular working schlep, peon human
being, along with everybody else, in order to be able to really be there
for someone. You have to be willing to admit "all the same pain and lies
everybody knows" to be of any real service through the heart. It's OK to
be a person. It's OK to get a little muddy. It's not the end of the
world. Arrogance is just a consequence of the fear of opening to be
> Thoa wrote:
> Hi Eiichi,
> As I said, people follow the path in myriad ways. If we all only do the
> obvious service work, we wouldn't have the richness in contribution from
> scientists, artists, writers, philosophers, etc. It's too easy to judge
> the obvious. We need to look at the whole picture. This is not to deny
> the importance of service.
It's ludicrous to expect people to be without self interest. It's the
defining mode of human existence. Let's try to understand. What often
looks like self involvement can actually be beneficial to humanity in
the long run. It's OK to be human. From the personal perspective you
can't rightly judge one way or the other. We really need to lighten up.
There is a lot of unconscious fear and self hatred masquerading as
underlying disdain for humanity in this so-called "spirituality." It's
too easy to puff up. It's a lot harder to bow low.
People will be people. If you can't accept or understand that, then
you're not ready to be of much service.
>> linking will be a discovery in the context of art history. I (and Thoa)
>> will be a first discoverer. But honestly I do not care.
> I feel famous!!! :o)
Eiichi, will you please share your dissertation with us when it's ready?
>> The fact that I am writing a dissertation in art history to get a degree
>> and hopefully to get a job concerning this area, does not kill my desire
>> to disseminate and share my ideas with the public. I had not gotten time
>> enough to deepen my idea about art until starting the PhD candidature in
>> Australia. I quit my comparatively lucrative job in Japan to get
>> this opportunity. I find this is a noble thing. Definitely thinking of
>> art through theosophy has enriched my understanding of art and
>> philosophy. I appreciate theosophists and members of this TS for this.
You have opened our eyes to a depth of understanding and inquiry few
have ever been willing to make. The seriousness of your purpose and the
sincerity of your appreciation shed new light on a valuable, yet obscure
phenomenon in 20th century Modernism. Mondrian's quest for a unifying
vision in his intention and practice opens doors for all those who are
willing to pursue his strategy of access and explore the grammatical
principles of his spiritual expression. You have my gratitude as an
artist. It is with just such intense personal commitment and effort that
progress is made by which all may benefit. Your exemplary nature and
dedication are an inspiration to all. Can an impulse to share real
understanding be anything less than selfless?
> You are doing the work and sharing with the Brotherhood of Mankind. Those
> who do not understand that ideas and art can greatly help in the evolution
> of mankind are ignorant.
The power of art to move people is largely unconscious. Let our best
intentions be towards the noble, however we understand it, and let the
rest aid to illumine our daily way.
>> To me writing about Mondrian especially in the context of theosophy and
>> philosophy in this concern occurs in the aura of the esoteric atmosphere
>> of Hinduism, Yoga and Theosophy (actually I first got the idea of
>> writing about 'Mondrian and Rhythm' while I was meditating on the rock
>> in the mountainous place called Madovan (maybe wrong spelling) in India,
>> which I visited to attend the Spiritual University of Raga Yoga sect. It
>> was a kind of a sacred inspiration to me).
Say "Thank You." A trail blazed in the wilderness is soon lost to all if
no one else traverses it. Your constitution is in harmony with the
nobility of his effort.
>> I hope in the future I'd like
>> to publish my dissertation and art historians will start to think about
>> the link between Western Modern Art and Hinduism (and Theosophy) more
>> seriously. This trend nobody can stop since the more deeply you meditate
>> on the spirituality in art, the more inevitably you encounter the
>> Hindu or esoteric doctrine. Who is the first discoverer of this does not
"There is only ever one discoverer. And all those discoveries, you will
have to make again."
> Even out of the context of esoteric atmosphere, your work would have
> still been valid. There have been many concepts, seemingly unrelated to the
> esoteric, that have enriched human evolution. In my mind, these
> seemingly unrelated events are also mystical in nature, if one would look
> closely at it.
The ordinary is the extraordinary.
>> Arguments between Thoa and I are now hitting the bedrock of Hegelian
>> logic, which sounds very scholastic and dry. However, this, I
>> believe, is not the hardest part. The hardest part will come later:
>> Mondrian (or Western abstract artists in this century) and Hinduism.
>> When we start to hit this bedrock, we may seek for the help
>> from other knowledgeable TS members.
That would be an interesting discussion.
> You know, Eiichi, theosophy's first leader, Helena Blavatsky, used many of
> the Hegelian ideas in her Secret Doctrine books.
>> I wonder whether we should retreat our arguments from this TS until we
>> get into more theosophical topics. Actually we retreated a couple of months
>> ago but later realized some of the members kept following our
>> argument and put them back on the list. I am pretty happy to retreat our
>> arguments for a while. What do you think, Thoa and other member of TS?
> Don't retreat. You never know who is listening with some great ideas.
> When you withdraw from others, all you get in response is yourself. When
> you share, you never know what you'll get back. Richness comes back a
> thousand fold in sharing, even if you are only sharing words.
I agree. The level of your discussion has been sophisticated and
incisive. There aren't many people who are willing to discuss art in
such a sincere way, let alone a spiritual context. If more people could
catch a glimpse of the depth of serious creative inquiry, perhaps new
art would emerge that would further the frontiers of our common
I would love, for example, to add to the general discussion, an
assessment of the art of Paul Klee, another early modernist who, along
with Kandinsky, deeply tapped the well springs of Creative Mystery and
was self possessed enough to write about it for both pedagogy and
>> I hope I am not disturbing the dissemination of your noble idea of
>> "Universal Brotherhood."
"Brotherhood" (universal or otherwise) depends on a respectful mutual
discourse between individual "brothers" and "sisters." You Eiichi, are
honored and most welcomed here.
WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application