The term ‘Sexual Act’ occupies a structurally central yet theoretically contested position across the depth-psychology corpus. Freud establishes the foundational framework in the Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality, treating the sexual act not as a discrete event but as the terminus of a developmental arc shaped by erotogenic zones, infantile component instincts, and the diphasic logic of object-choice. For Freud, what counts as ‘sexual’ vastly exceeds genital congress, and the act itself is intelligible only against the background of repression, sublimation, and perversion. Jung diverges sharply, arguing that reducing psychological energy to sexuality constitutes a biologism that occludes the symbolic and transformative dimensions of libido; the sexual act becomes, in his rereading, one expression of a broader psychic drive rather than its sovereign form. In the Tantric and Kashmir Shaiva traditions transmitted through Singh’s commentary on the Vijnana Bhairava, the sexual act acquires a contemplative valence: both direct and indirect modes of coition are interpreted as gateways to brahmic consciousness, integrating rather than suppressing erotic energy. Eliade and Burkert situate the sexual act within ritual and cosmological frameworks, reading it as a repetition of primordial hierogamy or as a social act requiring ritual containment. Merleau-Ponty approaches the matter phenomenologically, showing how sexuality diffuses throughout embodied perception rather than concentrating in any single act. Across this range, the sexual act emerges as a site where biology, symbol, ritual, and psychic transformation converge and compete.