The depth-psychology corpus treats ‘Spiritual Progress’ not as a linear ascent toward fixed perfection but as an inherently dynamic, open-ended, and often paradoxical movement of the soul. Across traditions — Orthodox hesychasm, Aurobindonian integral yoga, Taoist alchemy, Twelve-Step recovery spirituality, and Jungian depth psychology — the term resists simple teleological framing. The Philokalia authors insist on graduated ascent through virtue, contemplation, and theology, yet simultaneously warn that complacency arrests and even reverses the journey. Aurobindo envisions progress as evolutionary transmutation of consciousness rather than moral improvement, requiring a reversal of the normal primacy of body over spirit. The Alcoholics Anonymous tradition, particularly as articulated in the Big Book and theorized by Kurtz, explicitly replaces ‘spiritual perfection’ with ‘spiritual progress,’ encoding humility into the very grammar of the concept. The Taoist I Ching frames progress as gradual, organic ripening — geese ascending step by step — rather than willful striving. Sinkewicz’s reading of John Climacus foregrounds staged ascent through repentance, mourning, and humility. Throughout, a core tension persists: between progress as grace-dependent gift and progress as cooperative discipline, between the danger of spiritual pride that accompanies visible advancement and the equal danger of stagnation born of complacency.