The birth-death-rebirth cycle stands as one of the most architecturally central concepts in depth psychology, functioning simultaneously as cosmological template, developmental metaphor, and transformative experiential process. The corpus reveals at least three distinct registers in which the term operates. First, the transpersonal-clinical register, most elaborately theorized by Stanislav Grof, treats the cycle as a verifiable experiential sequence embedded in perinatal matrices and systematically accessed through non-ordinary states; here death and rebirth are not metaphors but phenomenological events with measurable therapeutic consequences. Second, the mythological-archetypal register, represented by Eliade, Campbell, Neumann, and Harrison, reads the cycle as the fundamental grammar of religious imagination across cultures — the cross-cultural motif that gives myth its salvific structure. Third, the metaphysical-soteriological register, evident in Sri Aurobindo’s evolutionism and the Tibetan Buddhist bardo doctrine transmitted through Evans-Wentz, situates the cycle within a cosmic ontology of karma, samsara, and liberation. The key tension in the corpus runs between those who regard the cycle as literally operative across incarnations and those who confine its significance to psychological transformation within a single lifetime. Neumann’s Great Mother archetype, Jung’s typology of rebirth, and Harrison’s palingenesia each navigate this tension differently, making the term a fulcrum for debates about literalism, symbolism, and the therapeutic function of mythic structure.