[Note: I italicize phrases I borrow from the chapter, and link to phrases I borrow from other chapters to help tie chapters together. While making it more tedious to read, the Tao Te Ching is best pondered in the context of the whole.

Compare the original terse Chinese, 'knowing not say', with One who knows does not speak. This embellishment, which translates the terse into beautiful and persuasive words, comes at a cost. This 'One who knows does not speak; one who speaks does not know' conveys a feeling of permanency. It can sounds like, 'If one knows, one will never speak' and 'if one speaks, one never knows'. This pulls us away from 'now' into 'ever' and 'never'. Back to 'now'...

When we're speaking (thinking or writing) we can't feel depth of knowing. Our 'forebrain' is making too much noise, i.e., opening the doors, honing the sharpness; increasing the glare. All we can really do is attempt to remember what we 'knew' in silence. Conversely, in the moments we know, we are unable to say. The thinking and speaking mind is like a light switch, when it's turned off we 'see' better; when it's turned on we are blinded by the glare. Oh, and it is desire's emotional energy that powers this light. The more energy, the brighter the glare.

The larger view of this chapter may be how our emotional agendas take us over hill and dale leaving old ruts behind. Intoxicated with emotional preferences, we sharpen distinctions and lose any sense of impartiality. The notion of mysterious sameness is enough to make us laugh out loud - I mean, what is the mysterious sameness between benefit and harm, beautiful [and] ugly or Jesus and Hitler, to name a few.

Pulled by a need to accomplish our private ends, our likes, dislikes, needs and fears, drive us to either get close to it, or keep it at arm's length; bestow benefit upon it, or do harm to it; ennoble it, or debase it. 'It',... what is 'it'? Well, you name it! Alas, the means don't brings us to the private ends we seek.

Letting my wheels move only along old ruts feels like settling where none would like to be. Mysterious sameness is not stimulating; we crave stimulation - especially in youth. Sure the 'child' (Haizi) in me still enjoys that stimulation, but the 'father' (Laozi) in me would never trade the old rut for those exciting by-paths of youth. Not that I have a choice. It is just that if I could, I wouldn't go back. Furthermore, in my youth, I would never have chosen to let my wheels move only along old ruts. Sure, the idea might have sounded 'cool', 'enlightened', 'spiritual', but I would have just been bored to death! All is naturally so, whether we like it or not. Ha!