When you exchange the word understanding for knowing this makes perfect sense, in my opinion. Understanding to me is having an array of concepts that form a logical whole. Knowing is what Krishnamurti describes in the above quote. That he saw understanding as knowing is understandable as no one seemed to be able to see the difference between these two words. This is only my perspective of it.
No fear is so small or petty that the fear of no-self isn’t at its heart.
All fear is ultimately fear of no-self.
Does that mean we can only be free if we become fearless of no self that, according to Jed, is our true essence? Jed seems to think this is the case. I don’t. Do you?
In my opinion source, (the Monad) is our true self (essence) but that is just my thinking. I am not afraid of source. Why should I? The Monad is an utter and complete mystery, probably the biggest mystery within all of creation. Why be afraid of the unknown? My fear is not caused by the unknown but by my understanding of what is and might come that threatens me and my fellow man.
To me there is no such thing as no-self. No-self is a state of non existence. If fear is ultimately fear of no-self than all fear is based on nothing. This is not the case as fear has to be based on something. According to Jed it is the loss of oneself that we fear but how can we lose ourselves when we are eternal beings. Just some thoughts that came to mind when I read this quote.
I read one of his books many years ago and think I can understand his thinking processes better now.