Weeping occupies a remarkably diverse position across the depth-psychology corpus, functioning simultaneously as ethological signal, spiritual practice, mythic gesture, and psychological event. The evolutionary-biological strand, represented most systematically by Lench (2018), treats weeping as a ritualized signal exapted from histamine-related stress responses: physiologically distinctive through pharyngeal constriction, psychic tear production, and ingressive phonation, it operates as a multimodal broadcast that elicits altruistic responses from observers and can terminate aggression. Within this framework weeping is biologically prepared yet subject to executive inhibition, its frequency inversely proportional to social rank. By contrast, the Christian ascetic tradition—Cassian, John Climacus, Evagrius via Hausherr, and the Philokalia—treats weeping as penthos, the gift of compunctive tears that purifies sin, signals repentance, and opens the soul to divine encounter. Here tears transform from bitter to sweet, from sorrow to joy, marking the frontier of spiritual rebirth. Estés reads weeping through archetypal-mythic lenses: the maiden’s tears germinate healing, melt icy hearts, and function as holy water repelling destructive forces. Alexiou’s classical scholarship situates weeping within the formal institution of ritual lamentation in Greek tradition, where it is communal, gendered, and formulaically structured. Sorabji’s Stoic analysis complicates the picture further, noting that tears can arise without cognitive assent—the phenomenon of disowned weeping challenging any purely judgement-based theory of emotion. Across these traditions the central tension concerns agency: is weeping involuntary signal, cultivated spiritual discipline, or communal performance?