Receptivity in the depth-psychology corpus occupies a remarkable conceptual crossroads, appearing simultaneously as a cosmological principle, a phenomenological category, a neurophysiological state, and a therapeutic precondition. The most sustained treatments arise from the Taoist I Ching tradition, where receptivity (坤, the quality of earth) is not mere passivity but a dynamic, generative capacity — the complement to creative yang force, without which nothing is brought to fruition. Liu I-ming and Thomas Cleary together articulate receptivity as the discipline of yielding to what is right, a cultivated openness that paradoxically produces strength. This cosmological framing stands in productive tension with the phenomenological account offered by Evan Thompson, drawing on Husserl, where receptivity is identified as the first and most primitive form of intentional activity — the ‘I notice’ that presupposes prior affective perturbation. From the neuroscientific side, Peter Levine positions receptivity as a mark of successful trauma transformation: when the nervous system recovers self-regulation, perception broadens to encompass acceptance without judgment. Panksepp introduces a strictly biological register, treating female sexual receptivity as hormonally mediated neurochemistry. The tensions among these registers — cosmic principle, phenomenological ground, therapeutic outcome, biological substrate — reveal why receptivity remains a generative term in depth-psychological discourse.