Fulfillment occupies a richly contested position across the depth-psychology corpus, operating simultaneously as a cosmological principle, a psychological telos, and a theological category. Dane Rudhyar articulates the most systematically elaborated framework, positioning fulfillment as the westward pole of a knowledge-action axis in which civilizational and individual cycles move from epistemic genesis toward experiential completion — a schema that absorbs astrological, geographic, and philosophical registers at once. The Taoist I Ching tradition, rendered through Liu I-ming and Thomas Cleary, frames fulfillment as the satisfying of inner emptiness through disciplined alignment with the Tao, where self-cultivation and the merging of yin and yang constitute the conditions of its attainment. Joseph Campbell introduces a thanatological dimension, arguing that death rightly understood is the consummate fulfillment of a life’s direction — an affirmation embedded in myth, sacrifice, and the Crucifixion narrative alike. The figural hermeneutics of Auerbach and the scriptural theology of Thielman and Bleuler’s index reference to wish-fulfillment each mark how the term migrates between literary, eschatological, and psychoanalytic registers. Across these voices, a productive tension persists: whether fulfillment is achieved through self-directed striving, received as grace from a transcendent Other, or accomplished by structural forces — historical, cosmological, archetypal — that operate beyond the individual will.