The ritual process, as the depth-psychology corpus treats it, is not merely a sequence of ceremonial actions but a dynamic structural mechanism through which individuals and communities negotiate transformation, social order, and psychic reorganization. Victor Turner’s foundational work establishes the principal framework: ritual is the arena in which social crises are dramatized, symbolic systems are made legible, and the dialectic between structure and anti-structure is enacted. Turner’s Ndembu ethnography demonstrates that ritual reveals ‘values at their deepest level,’ a claim that resonates throughout the corpus. Jungian and post-Jungian writers — Jung, Neumann, Moore, Johnson, and Thomas Moore — extend this structural anthropology into depth-psychological territory, reading ritual process as the outer enactment of inner archetypal dynamics, particularly those governing initiation, rebirth, and masculine individuation. The liminal phase, with its communitas of undifferentiated belonging, becomes for these thinkers a correlate of the unconscious itself. Burkert approaches the ritual process from a bio-evolutionary and philological angle, emphasizing its adaptive function in maintaining group cohesion. Tensions persist between those who privilege the social-structural function of ritual and those who locate its primary significance in individual psychological transformation. The Daoist material in Kohn adds a comparative dimension, showing how recursive, temporally complex rite sequences constitute alternative theories of ritual efficacy.