Sanctity, as it appears across the depth-psychology and comparative-religion corpus, is not simply moral excellence or ecclesiastical designation but a charged ontological category whose boundaries are perpetually contested. The tradition inherited from Rudolf Otto insists that sanctity is irreducible to rational or ethical content; it belongs to the numinous, a sui generis mode of apprehension that precedes theology. Jane Ellen Harrison radicalizes this further, inverting the naive assumption that gods confer sanctity upon objects: primitive materials and places are experienced as sacred first, and deities emerge from that prior charge — le sacré est le père du dieu. Mircea Eliade deepens the spatial dimension, arguing that sanctuaries continuously resanctify a world otherwise liable to profanation. Within the Philokalic tradition, sanctity is an interior achievement: the complete mortification of sensory desire, purification from passion, and gradual participation in divine light — a definition sharply different from mere behavioral virtue. James reports visionary states in which sanctity is conferred directly through mystical union with the divine Persons. Hillman retrieves Jung’s clinical experience of ‘inexpressible sanctity’ and links it, via Heidegger, to the gathering depth of the colour blue — holiness as phenomenological quality rather than moral predicate. What unites these divergent accounts is the insistence that sanctity marks a boundary between ordinary and extraordinary being, a boundary that is simultaneously experiential, cosmological, and transformative.