Heart Knowing designates a mode of cognition that the depth-psychological corpus consistently positions as prior to, and irreducible by, discursive intellect. The tradition draws on heterogeneous sources — Sufi metaphysics, archetypal psychology, Buddhist epistemology, and neuroscience — yet converges on a shared claim: that the heart is not merely an affective organ but an organ of perception, capable of registering truths that conceptual reasoning obscures. Hillman’s ‘thought of the heart,’ elaborated through Ficino, Harvey, and Corbin’s himma, locates this faculty in an imaginal, animal alertness to the ‘face of things’ — an aesthetic aisthesis irreducible to sentiment. Corbin’s rendering of Ibn ‘Arabi specifies the heart as the seat of hierophanic knowledge, a mirror in which Divine Reality is reflected when purified of admixture. Welwood draws on Mahayana Buddhism to argue that heart and mind share a single Sanskrit root, chitta, pointing to a ‘direct knowing of reality’ that is open and friendly rather than abstractly rational. Maté invokes the fox’s counsel in Saint-Exupéry to distinguish truth-that-heals — known by felt sense — from verifiable but soul-blind fact. Johnson identifies heart-level knowing with Jung’s feeling function as a valuing faculty, not a mere emotion. The central tension in the corpus lies between this valorization of cardiac epistemology and the danger of its romantic sentimentalization — a danger Hillman addresses by insisting on the heart’s inherent duplicity and by grounding it in perceptual, not merely emotional, life.