The term ‘Law’ traverses the depth-psychology corpus along several converging axes, none of them reducible to jurisprudence alone. Plato’s Laws furnishes the most architecturally sustained treatment: law here is simultaneously pedagogical instrument, cosmological principle, and moral mirror, distinguished by its double form — bare command supplemented by persuasive prelude — and measured against the soul’s capacity for ordered self-governance. The Pauline strand, mediated through Thielman’s theological synthesis, positions the Mosaic law as a historically bounded, eschatologically superseded custodian: it defines sin, pronounces the curse, yet cannot justify; Christ’s death alone reverses that curse and ushers in the Spirit’s era. John of Damascus deploys ‘law’ in an ontological register — the Sabbath law as divine pedagogy for carnal Israel, external constraint pointing toward interior transformation. Benveniste’s etymological probe uncovers an archaic semantic stratum beneath ‘law’ proper: the Indo-European med- denotes authoritative, time-tested measure that restores order from confusion, anticipating both medical and legislative meanings. Seaford situates cosmological law at the contested intersection of nomos, money, and presocratic philosophy, arguing that ‘law’ in early Greek thought is implicit rather than consciously articulated. Across all these voices, law functions as the structural tension between external compulsion and interior formation — the central problematic of moral psychology.