Unraveling a Sentence Reveals a Worldview — Why Transurfing and Tufti Are Hard to Understand (Part 3) — High Information Density

Since the other day, I have been digging into the reasons why

“there are actual reasons why Transurfing and Tufti are difficult”
one by one. The first reason is



that it is not intended for everyone in the first place.

The second is

that there is not much pressure to “convey things clearly.”

And now, the third.

To begin with, the information density is high.

“High information density” here does not simply mean that there are many technical terms,

that the sentences are long,
or that a lot of knowledge is packed into one book.


It means that information that is inherently highly abstract is written in highly compressible Russian,

and then further transferred to another language and culture.
Zeland's writing sometimes has layers upon layers folded into a single word or a single paragraph:
premises, worldviews,
metaphors,

counterarguments,
irony,

practical methods,
and foreshadowing for later chapters.
It's like a mille-feuille.
That is why, while reading,
you don't know what the current topic will connect to later.
And yet,
it does connect later.

It is certainly dense.
—

From Chapter 1, there is no mercy.

At the beginning of “Reality Transurfing,” it starts with a discussion about fate.
However, it does not proceed straight to

“You can change your life.”

Fatalism.

Past and future lives.

Self-persuasion for happiness.
Effort and struggle.
Materialism and idealism.
The multifaceted nature of reality.
The parable of the blind men touching an elephant.
Quantum particle-wave duality.
The information field.
Only after piling up such discussions does it finally enter the world model of


the space of variations.

If this were the seminar industry, you would probably, no, definitely be stopped halfway through.

“It's too long.”

“Please give the conclusion first.”
“Let's stick to one metaphor.”

“First-time listeners won't be able to keep up.”
Zeland himself is at least concerned about whether the reader is confused by the physics-based explanations.

At least.



However,

he does not stop.

He continues as is. Hey, I think.

But when you re-read it later, that long introduction is not just a detour. Reality has multiple facets. One explanation alone should not be taken as absolute truth. The reality you see changes depending on which world model you adopt.

The foundation for reading the rest of Transurfing as a whole is laid from the very beginning.

—

If you extract just one sentence, it becomes something else.

Zeland's words can be cut out in short snippets.

For example,

“The world is a mirror.”
“Choose reality.”
“Lower importance.”
“Manage your attention.”
“Return to your true self.”

They are all short.

They can even be made into short videos.

However, if you extract just one sentence, it looks like

common self-help jargon.

If it is just “What you focus on becomes reality,” I have heard that somewhere before.

But beneath that, there is a massive structure of:

sleep,

internal and external screens,

the center of awareness,
identification,
internal and external intention,
the mirror of the world,
time lag,
and the space of variations.
Therefore, when summarizing, if you say,
“In short, let's think positively,”



the moment you say “in short,” almost everything disappears.



It is not so much that you have reduced the amount of information,

but rather that you have remade it into a different philosophy.

—

Abstract words do not mean they have little information.

Abstraction,
while there are many ways to explain it depending on the person,

can be described not as “something that is hard to understand,”
but as “containing many things.”

For example,

Vadim Zeland.

↓
Human.
↓
Mammal.
↓
Animal.
↓
Living organism.
As you increase the level of abstraction, individual information becomes harder to see, while the range covered by the word becomes larger.

And,
while concrete and simple know-how is easy to sell,
things with a high level of abstraction, such as

“it is not easy,”
“it takes time,”

and “only that person can do it themselves,”
can sometimes get closer to the essence.
You can understand this very well when reading Zeland's writing.


Just because it is abstract does not mean the content is thin.


It is the opposite.

Many phenomena are folded into one word like a mille-feuille. That is why it cannot be unfolded immediately. —

Things that come from a high place become abstract.

From here on,
this is a discussion following Zeland's own way of speaking.

Zeland repeatedly states that the knowledge and words of Transurfing and Tufti


“were not devised from scratch by his own reason.” They descended from the information field.

He was a repeater receiving them.

He was permitted to use them.
The knowledge manifested.
He uses such expressions.
Whether this can be proven as a fact,

I will set aside for now.

However, at least Zeland himself


does not perceive it as having written his own personal ideas by assembling them in order.

He understands it as
there being a large structure first, which he then brought down into the form of human language and books.


That is how he thinks. Here,
I remembered a diagram that was distributed in a course I participated in previously. (It was a course that incorporated Koshinto concepts into business.)

The higher you go, the higher the level of abstraction, energy, and inclusion range become,
and the further down you descend from there, the more it branches into concrete events and individual lives.
For some reason, that diagram overlaps now.

Of course,

I do not intend to use this diagram as proof that “the information field Zeland speaks of is the fifth dimension, and Transurfing came from there.”

But when considered as a metaphor,
it is very easy to understand.

When bringing a structure that exists at a high level of abstraction down into three-dimensional everyday language,

many meanings are compressed into a single word.
And the moment it becomes concrete,

it can only express a part of it.
In other words,



I think it is fair to say that the book itself is already a compression of massive information.


—

On top of that, Russian was a compressed language.

And what tormented me was the Russian language.

I realized this deeply while building the site, but Russian has an extremely high compression rate.
Word endings.

Cases.
Verb aspects.
Prefixes.
Root connections.
Context.
Such things are packed into a single word.

I felt something similar with Sanskrit, but

things that would require many lines of explanation in Japanese
are sometimes placed as a single word in Russian.
Conversely, if you mechanically replace that one word
with one Japanese word,

a considerable amount of information is lost.
Therefore, this is not just a simple word substitution.


It is closer to the work of thawing something frozen without breaking its shape.

Moreover, language is not just a container. We think using words.

This means that if the structure of the language is different,

the way of compartmentalizing thoughts is also different.

Trying to understand a world constructed in Russian

through Japanese might be as different as
trying to understand rugby tactics

using only soccer rules,
just because both use a ball.

Both use a ball.

But the structure of the sport is different.
I should have learned my lesson with Sanskrit,
but I have fallen into a similar swamp again...

—

The usage of the word “control” was a no-go with a high probability...

For example, there is the term

“management of attention”

that appears repeatedly in Tufti-related communications on Zeland's official site and the Transurfing Center. It is a direct translation of the Russian.

But.
“Huh? Was that word even in the Tufti book?”

you might think, right?

Yes.
It is not written as “management of attention.”

In the first place, living a normal life,

you wouldn't say, “Let's manage our attention today.”
As Japanese, it is quite stiff.

Quite IMF (Incomprehensible Meaning).

That is why in the book:

* “Observing where consciousness is directed” (Lesson 4 title)

* “Controlling where consciousness is directed”
* “Being mindful of where consciousness is directed” (as an explanation of attention tracking)

* “Diverting consciousness (from internal and external screens) and directing it to the ‘center of awareness’”

is how it is written.

What made me want to cry when I started translating was that in Japanese, “consciousness” and “attention” are unified into the same word “ishiki,”
but in the context of Transurfing/Tufti,
“consciousness (Сознание: awareness or recognition itself)” and

“attention (Внимание: the arrow/focus that directs energy)” are treated as clearly different concepts.

“Aren't they the same?”
you might think.
I thought so too.
But gradually, the “Hmm?” moments increased,
and... it became decisive with Self-Transurfing.

And then, there is “control.”

In the past,
I have written “control attention.”

I used it a lot.
It is easy to understand.

It is easy to visualize.
In the book, and in many commentaries,

the word “control” is sometimes used.
However.
It was discovered that “management (Управление: upravlenie)” and

“control (Контроль: kontrol)” are strictly distinguished as clearly different things...

At the Transurfing Center,
it is also mentioned many times that “‘management of attention’ is not control.”
Management here has the nuance of


steering, handling.



For example, it is explained like this:
“If you cannot drive (manage) a car, you will fall into a ditch. If you cannot drive (manage) your attention, you will fall into a negative state.” When we grip the steering wheel of a car,
we don't tense up and try to “control” it, do we?

(Otherwise, it's a recipe for an accident.)

It is an image of placing your hands on the wheel in a relaxed state (or with composure), and smoothly adjusting the direction (steering) to match the road (reality).
“Management” is like naturally gripping the steering wheel of a car
and choosing your path according to the situation.
“Control” is a state of “I must not fail,”

“I must do it this way,”
clinging to the steering wheel and tensing your body.
The more you try to control, the more tense you become,
and you end up unable to steer.

Therefore,
if you translate it as “control” in the context of Tufti,
there is a possibility that you will end up doing the opposite of what you should be doing.
It is just one word.


But behind that one word,
attention,
agency,

tension,
suppression,
internal intention,
external intention,
and how to relate to reality

are all connected.
No wonder translation takes time.

—

A world where "to change" and "to betray" are close

When looking at Russian,

meanings that are far apart in Japanese
can exist near the same root.

"To change" and "to betray" might be expressed by the same word.


As a Japanese speaker,

you might think,

what does that mean?

But come to think of it,

the fact that something changes
also means it does not remain in its previous state.

The former self.
The former promise.
The former affiliation.
The former perspective.

If you stand on the side that has left those behind,
change can sometimes look like "betrayal."

Within a single word,

transformation and defection,
renewal and contradiction

are in close proximity.

This is where I am made to realize that
if languages differ, the way the world is carved up differs too.

However, Zeland
does not explain it every time.

For a Russian speaker,
it is not something that needs explaining.

Even if a Japanese book says "hara o kukuru" (to brace oneself/literally: to tie up one's belly),

Japanese people

"Why the belly?"
"Where in the abdomen?"

probably wouldn't ask.

But if you translate it literally into a foreign language, it becomes meaningless.

The same thing is likely happening
all over the text.

—

That is why passing a single word to an AI is not enough

AI translation is very convenient.

I use it too.

Or rather, without AI,
it is almost impossible to handle the current workload alone.

However, it does not mean the Japanese the AI first outputs
can be adopted as is.

Sometimes I encounter moments
where my jaw almost drops.

For one Russian word,

management.
steering.
control.
operation.
mastery.
leading.

Which one to place?

That cannot be decided by a dictionary alone.

The surrounding context.
Zeland's worldview.
How the same word is used in other articles.
How Tatiana supplements it in her lectures.
What kind of physical sensation that translation
evokes in a Japanese reader.

You have to look that far.

4 hours with AI.

Sometimes 5 hours.

Yeah.

What is time-saving?

—

It is not that there is a lot of information, but that it is folded

I will say it again.

The reason Zeland's works are difficult
is not just because there is a large amount of information lined up.
The information is folded.



There is a worldview within a single sentence. There is a practical stance within a single word.

There is a design leading to later works within a single chapter.



Moreover, the language itself, which is the vessel for receiving that information, is different from ours
. So even if you read it once, it does not all unfold. You don't understand it at the time.

Read another chapter.

Read another book.

Practice it.

Something happens in your life.

And later,

Oh, was that what it meant?

A single sentence suddenly opens up.

It is not that new information was added.

What was folded there from the beginning

was finally unfolded

due to changes on this side.

—

Make it easy to understand. But do not over-thaw

So what I want to do at Heh

is not to turn difficult sentences into simple, different things.

Of course, I will provide supplements.

Explain terms.
Write the background.
Make it possible to return to the source.
Connect related articles.

But,

I will not confine everything to a single meaning

by saying "in short, this is it."

Because,
if you unfold it too much to make it easy to understand,

then
the multifaceted nature contained within it will be lost.

Thaw the frozen knowledge.

But do not let it fall apart.

I hope to be able to do that.

Do not sacrifice density for the sake of ease of understanding.

This phrase is not a slogan to look cool.

Facing a single Russian word,

"Management... no, steering?
But it's different from domination, and control is actually a no-go..."

It is a quite earnest editorial policy

that emerged after holding my head in my hands.

—

The reason Transurfing and Tufti are hard to understand.

The third reason is

because the information density is high.

However, to be precise,

it is because a large structure is compressed into small words.

I think that is it.

And to decompress that,

you need not only a dictionary,
but also context, practice, and time.

No wonder it's hard to understand.

But.

That is precisely why, even after many years, it still opens up.

Next time,

I will dig into the story that it is not written

for what the reader "wants."

Isn't Zeland writing

not for the answer the reader wants now,

but for a need the person themselves is not yet aware of?

That is the kind of story it is.