Inner transformation stands as one of the most richly contested and variously theorized concepts in the depth-psychology library, cutting across Jungian analytic psychology, Sufi mysticism, Aurobindian integral yoga, Taoist alchemy, and Tibetan Buddhist practice. The corpus reveals no single doctrine but rather a family of convergent claims: that the human psyche harbors layers of conditioning, projection, and unconscious content whose progressive integration constitutes a genuine structural change in the person rather than mere behavioral adjustment. Jung’s typology of transformation — distinguishing spontaneous, ritual, and technical modes — provides an important taxonomic anchor, while Murray Stein’s developmental reading frames the emergence of the Self as the telos of this process, particularly in the second half of life. Vaughan-Lee situates the term within Sufi dreamwork, arguing that unwithdrown projections literally block inner transformation, while Aurobindo extends the concept cosmically, treating integral transformation as Nature’s ultimate self-disclosure through a spiritualized body-mind. Hoeller and the Gnostic-alchemical strand insist that meaningful transformation is categorically distinct from mere change, requiring an opus contra naturam. Tozzi and the Active Imagination tradition emphasize that transformation of autonomous complexes is the very criterion by which the efficacy of depth-analytic work is judged. The tension between spontaneous and technically induced transformation, between individual and cosmic scope, and between psychological and metaphysical registers gives this term its enduring productive complexity.