Across the depth-psychology corpus, ‘yielding’ functions primarily as a technical-cosmological term rooted in the I Ching’s yin-yang polarity, yet its resonances extend into questions of receptivity, responsiveness, and the proper relation between force and acquiescence in psychological and ethical life. The major voices — Huang, Ritsema and Karcher, Wilhelm, and Wang Bi — converge on the proposition that yielding (SHUN in Ritsema’s rendering; the soft or yin line in Wilhelm and Huang) is not passive negation but an active, structurally necessary complement to firmness. Huang articulates this most explicitly: yin’s quality is ‘positive — yielding, responding, and cooperating,’ and the absence of yielding produces brittleness in yang rather than strength. Ritsema’s concordance locates SHUN (‘give way and be’) throughout the hexagram commentaries as a governance principle, linking yielding to heaven’s mandate, to the actualization of tao by the superior person, and to the productive tension of hemicycles. A central tension in the corpus concerns whether yielding risks capitulation to darkness: Huang’s treatment of Retreat clarifies that strategic withdrawal of the yin lines is itself a form of dynamic agency that forces the solid lines to regroup. Thus yielding is irreducible to submission; it is a mode of attunement to time, situation, and the law of change — an insight that aligns the I Ching material with broader depth-psychological themes of ego-surrender, receptivity to the unconscious, and the cultivation of non-coercive action.