
Divine Feminine Gnosis: The Lesser and Greater Mysteries of Sophia, by Lee Irwin
Inner Traditions, 979-8888502532, 304 pages, December 2025
Within Lee Irwin’s Divine Feminine Gnosis: The Lesser and Greater Mysteries of Sophia is a challenge many books discussing esoteric topics face: the author must diligently walk the fine line between coherently communicating their ideas, experiences, and sentiments within the limits of language, with one hand, and gesturing toward the veiled dance of the deeper Mystery with the other. And the attempt to thread this needle in order to present the reader with a tapestry of divine feminine–i.e. Sophianic–wisdom is an even greater challenge due to the diversity of expression that such wisdom can take, as Irwin himself acknowledges.
The book is divided into two main sections: the Lesser and Greater Mysteries, which correspond to Praxis (practice, lived-experience, development of feminine values) and Sophiana (the hidden esoteric realities that ground and unify the expressions of feminine gnosis in one’s lived experience). While the latter half is certainly more abstract and metaphysical, it covers familiar Gnostic territory: Divine Union, the World Soul, Aeons, Rebirth, and how they connect to the lived-expressions of Sophia through the Body, Soul, and Mind as discussed in the first half.
At the outset, Irwin himself suggests that attempting to read the book in a typically “masculine” way: e.g. looking for precise, logical argumentation meant to arrive at a determinate conclusion, is not fitting for the content of the feminine gnosis. Throughout the text, Irwin takes great care to distinguish how the potentially limitless expression of Sophia–the divine source of this embodied, intuitive, and creative feminine type of knowing–differs from the masculine patterns that have dominated the religious and social institutions of our inherited past.
In a sense, because Sophianic knowing explicitly does not seek a final, closed formulation of beliefs, theory, or way of being-in-the-world, it seems difficult to provide any concrete examples of how divine feminine wisdom manifests in the world. Instead, Irwin relies upon the masculine/feminine contrast–using the distinction of what feminine gnosis is not like–along with repeated cycles of key descriptors to illuminate the topic.
Although Irwin’s presentation of the Lesser Mysteries is meant to reveal how feminine gnosis shows up in the world of our experience, this is especially where illustrating particular instances of feminine wisdom and/or practices that may open one to the grace of Sophia would be helpful for the reader. In lieu of this, Irwin presents iterations of generalized descriptions and “guiding principles” that often lack means toward practical application.
For example, Irwin writes, “The grounded praxis is simply to be loving and compassionate, to express care and concern that is heart-centered, in the most direct and genuine sense,”1 and “In post-traditional spirituality, what matters most is direct personal insights and how those insights contribute to a better, more mature world.”2 As a reader, I was left wondering: How do I become simply loving and compassionate? What is insight? How do we recognize and/or cultivate this capacity?
Irwin gestures at some practices which may help foster insight, such as meditation, soul-based education, creative projects, and dreamwork–indeed, Irwin’s only concrete example of a praxis is a simple, three-step process for dream analysis. Although the accumulation and refining of insight is one of the most frequent ways Irwin describes the ingress of Sophianic wisdom to lived-experience, this term does not even warrant a mention in the Index. Nor is insight differentiated from intuition, another key capacity for receiving Sophia’s gifts.
In the end, feminine gnosis comes down to some special way of knowing. Such knowledge is not based in abstract, rationalistic doctrines or privileged states of consciousness bequeathed by an (often patriarchal) authority or tradition. It is a “secret knowledge” (a common Gnostic trope) in the sense that it cannot be codified into language, emerging uniquely for each individual, and aimed toward the formulation and realization of certain qualities within both the individual, society, and Cosmos. E.g. inclusive equality of all beings and ways of life (people, animals, plants, minerals, angels, the deceased, etc.), mediated by mature loving relationships and guiding principles that foster universal well-being and the creative actualization of possibility awaiting exploration beyond the horizon of previous experience.
Despite the reservations I felt about Irwin’s style/structure, Divine Feminine Gnosis began to resonate on a deeper level over time, marinating with more exposure to the potentially inexhaustible ways Sophia weaves within the Mystery of Being. I urge readers who may be highly-analytic (myself included) to consider Irwin’s early guidance in how to read his book in the Preface and Opening (xi – 12). Personally, I found that pulling back and softening my focus on the text (even taking a break!) made reading flow far better, and without the feeling I was missing/losing content.
I also found some of Irwin’s characterizations of “masculine” religions, wisdom traditions, etc. to be more abrasive, dichotomizing, and dismissive than necessary (not the most inclusive, holistic, respectful attitude, in my opinion). However, this emphasized that the revitalization of feminine Wisdom in our world cannot happen without disrupting the excesses of masculine patterns of thinking-being that grip us at individual and collective scales. For readers who may be more comfortable in these more masculine patterns (scientific, rationalistic, etc.), I found Irwin’s perspective resonated with contemporary cognitive science: e.g. McGilchrist’s argument that our brain’s left hemisphere (analytic, control-oriented) is playing the role of “master” rather than playing the emissary of the (holistic, relational) right hemisphere.
Irwin’s work was inspiring as it was illuminating, inviting a courageous openness to adopt a new perspective. Without this openness, I may not have persisted to the end of the book–and would’ve missed one of the most deeply resonant expressions:
“The incarnate world is the center of creation, not some lower level, but the very heart and soul of becoming as embodied life seeks to maximize our deepest potentials. We need physical life to actually reach maturity; we need the challenges and limitations as a means within which we can form and develop new structures and patterns of becoming.”3

Zak has two master’s degrees in philosophy, from Brandeis University and University of California Santa Barbara. He is currently the lead editor for Dungeons in a Box, and he spends much of his time in the realm of fantasy crafting new plots and ensuring the adventure is in mechanical balance. When he’s not DMing, he also enjoys hiking, studying eastern philosophy, and playing board games.


























