The concept of boundary traverses the depth-psychology corpus along several distinct but intersecting axes. In somatic and trauma-informed work — most extensively articulated by Pat Ogden — boundary names the embodied capacity to protect the self from intrusion, and its failure or distortion is read as a direct legacy of traumatic experience. Ogden distinguishes overbounded and underbounded styles, situating boundary not as an intellectual position but as procedural, body-inscribed learning. Hillman approaches boundary from an archetypal-mythological direction: senex-consciousness is the very principle that draws boundary lines, making possible territory, selfhood, the sacred temenos, and the symbolic order itself. Without boundary there is no container, no initiation, no ontological distinction. Damasio and Thompson, from neuroscience and enactive biology, treat boundary as the organismic condition for singular identity — the semipermeable membrane that simultaneously separates and connects an interior from its environment is the material ground of autopoiesis and, by extension, of consciousness. Abram extends this to language, which constitutes a perceptual boundary between community and world. Across these registers a persistent tension emerges: boundary enables individuation and protects the self, yet its rigidity forecloses relation, growth, and permeability. The corpus thus frames boundary as constitutively ambivalent — at once the condition of selfhood and the site of its wounding.