In Laozi (Tao Te Ching), there are also related to this sentence: "Many words are poor (Chapter 5)", "Sages teach no words (Chapter 2)" and so on.
In my opinion, the implication of these statements is not to discuss the issue of "not saying words is wisdom" or "saying how much is good", but to refer to the same center, that is, "Tao is natural (Chapter 25) and doing nothing".
The literal translation of "Tao is natural" means "Tao imitates itself (self) so (naturally)".
Simply put, it is not people or anything else that created the Tao and can dominate it.
The "existence" and "operation" of Tao come from its inherent laws or norms. Not controlled by manpower, divine power or other external forces. He comes and goes naturally.
As for Laozi's "Tao", it is difficult to explain, but it can be understood as the essence of everything, the essential law of all phenomena in the world, the highest truth (ultimate truth) and so on.
In a word, from Tao, Law and Nature, we can know that the essential laws of all things in the world come from nature, and are not subject to external forces such as human beings, nor can they be forcibly changed. Just like the physical and chemical laws of a space, we can't artificially create and change control. People can only live and create according to this law, and violation is failure.
Back to the point. If you want to say what it means to be speechless, let's start with never doing it. Because Laozi's "quietness" is actually a manifestation of "inaction".
The "inaction" here is certainly not doing nothing. Because Lao Tzu himself said, "Nothing is nothing (Chapter 37)". In other words, if you do nothing, there is nothing you can't do.
Then why is inaction called inaction? It's all because "Taoism is natural".
Everything exists and develops according to its own essence and laws. What everyone needs to do is to conform to this essence and law. Follow the trend is to become a part of this nature, that is, "inaction" and "inaction." Confucianism says that weather, geography and human harmony, or what we generally call timely and homeopathic, belong to "inaction" In the political field, the policy of "rest and recuperation" in the early Han Dynasty was the most famous political practice of "inaction".
Doing nothing is like sailing against the current. You don't need to paddle forward. You just need to sit on the boat to get to your destination. The difficult thing is to know the law of "sailing with the current" first, then find such a waterway, and then build a ship. So "inaction" is not simple.
Then "silence" is much easier. "Speech" belongs to "action", and "silence" naturally belongs to a manifestation of "inaction". "No words and no words" does not mean no words, but "no nonsense". For Laozi, "words" not only refer to words, but also to government decrees. For one's own sake, regardless of world laws, arguments, etc. It violates the "Tao" of nature that Laozi does not push. On the contrary, "quietness" conforms to the "Tao" of nature. If the meaning is expanded, there are many meanings, such as "what should be said" and "what can't be said".
For example, "saints teach no words" does not mean that saints educate everyone with words, or educate people with words.
Explain it in a popular way, because saints have mastered the essence or laws of human learning and behavior. You should know that people will learn from others and change in the environment. So when he educates everyone, he won't order others to do what they have to do. But with their own actions, their own words, slowly influence everyone. When others see the actions and remarks of saints, they will naturally realize their own gaps and their own shortcomings. That kind of consciousness is to urge yourself to change spontaneously, and saints become role models. Saints don't impose anything on others, don't give orders, don't preach, but set an example with the simplest existence. Therefore, saints are not "leading by example", but "teaching by example". To put it bluntly, saints have actually done nothing, and they usually do what they should do, but they have educated countless people themselves, which is also "inaction."
To sum up, "the knower doesn't speak, and the speaker doesn't know" certainly doesn't mean that "the knower" or "the wise man" doesn't talk or chat with others, and doesn't say the correct words and waits for others to understand. On the contrary, it is unwise to say it (I don't know).
Here, silence means "don't talk nonsense" (in line with the law, the world, etc. Say what you should say ...), and "nonsense" means the opposite. (As mentioned above, "knowing without speaking" is actually a manifestation of "inaction")