Wilderness Mysticism in the depth-psychology corpus does not name a single school but rather a contested territory where the encounter with untamed nature is read as a vehicle for—or, in Giegerich’s more rigorous framing, the logical structure of—psychological and spiritual transformation. The term gathers at minimum three distinct valences. First, Giegerich reads ‘wilderness’ philosophically: it is not a landscape to be experienced but a noetic condition that psychology enters the moment it submits to the uncompromising question of Truth, an encounter figured by the Actaion myth and the epiphany of Artemis. Second, Clarissa Pinkola Estés reads wilderness as the endangered interior territory of the feminine instinctive psyche, homologous with the literal wild: its loss is simultaneously an ecological and a psychological catastrophe. Third, the clinical wilderness-therapy literature (Russell, Harper, Bettmann, Beck) treats the wilderness environment instrumentally—as a change-producing context for adolescent treatment—largely bracketing any mystical dimension. Walter Otto and David Abram occupy an intermediate position, attending to the uncanny, numinous quality of wild nature as the site where a more-than-human intelligence addresses the human sensorium. The central tension in the corpus runs between those who insist wilderness must be thought (Giegerich), those who insist it must be felt and inhabited (Estés, Abram), and clinicians for whom it is a therapeutic setting.