Have you ever been let down by a person you trusted as a consequence of their personal weakness or their lack of principles?

Everyone is a “good person” when the pathway is smooth, but when life muddles the situation, it’s often challenging to find someone with a backbone.

Having principles, the ability to discern, and the courage to act accordingly, are three traits of what is called a “person of integrity”, but to what degree are they imperative?

This article begins by examining some of the Yoga Yamas (Universal moral codes) and their intricacies at the moment in which they should be applied. Then, it contemplates on why courage is a trait of a person with integrity. Finally, it analyses some of the obstacles that blind the capacity to discern.

If we define a person with integrity as the one who thinks, feels, and acts in harmony, it’s uncommon to find anyone who fits this title. Although it is clear that no one is born with it, it seems that integrity is not so much the result of experience as it is of will. It could be stated that a “backbone” gradually grows after a progression of unyielding decisions sprouted from frustration. For this reason, a genuine commitment to stick to universal principles is necessary for any person to cultivate integrity.

Fundamentally the “Yamas” can be described as the moral principles contained within the philosophical system of Ashtanga Yoga. Perhaps due to the influence of Mr. Gandhi and the New Age movement, the first of the Yamas, “ahimsa” or non-violence, has been misunderstood by the vast majority. They state that the violence used by some must be withstood stoically by anyone adhering to this principle. But far from this, the Natural Law says that every being has the right to protect himself against any violence conducted towards him with the necessary force to stop the assault, if necessary even with lethal force.

To make sure that the reader is speaking the same language, it is crucial to accurately describe particular concepts. Since “ahimsa” is the first idea to be discussed, let’s define the word “violence”.

Most of us have grown with a wrong idea of what violence is. We have the inaccurate image that any use of force is violence, with contempt of how and why it is applied. It’s vital to make a clear distinction between “force” and “violence”.

Force is the capacity to do work or cause physical change. It is an action which is in harmony with morality and Natural Law because it does not violate others’ rights.

Violence, on the other hand, is any coercive action that is always immoral, and therefore goes against Natural Law, because it involves a violation of the inherent rights of someone else. Violence is the immoral initiation of physical power to coerce, force and oblige without right and is always connected with the one who initiates the conflict.

Most of us have probably faced at least once in our lives the subsequent scenario:

-Two kids fighting at school, and the teacher solves the problem by penalising them both. The kids start to argue about who started it, while the teacher is oblivious to this because “fighting is not allowed”. The teacher is not actively interested in what happened, nor who started it.

As a result both kids are grounded in a completely unfair outcome, for only one of them has initiated the conflict. With this, the teacher is putting both sides in the same box, where there was merely one culprit: the one who initiated the violence. The kid who was defending himself was using force, not violence.

If one sticks to the idea of ahimsa without including the concept of self-defence, that process by inertia will eventually end up as violence towards oneself. Consequently, in order to understand the concept of ahimsa to its fullest, it’s crucial to have a crystal-clear comprehension of self-defence. When the right of self-defence is not applied, an aggressor can easily abuse anyone without facing opposition. In a world were the acceptance of injustice without resistance is becoming the norm, perhaps now more than ever, there is an urgency to begin considering the right to self-defence.

Another quality attributed to someone with integrity is how honest one is. Satya, or truthfulness, the second of the Yamas in Ashtanga Yoga, may be defined as the alignment of our words, thoughts and deeds with the truth.

Let us now define “truth” in the hope to dismiss any misunderstanding. To define truth is a challenging task for many, but the definition of truth is very simple: truth is everything that has happened in the past and that is happening in the present moment. Truth doesn’t exist in the future, because the future is yet to happen.

Satya, just as ahimsa, possesses another dimension, which is “perceiving” truth. It can be taken as a two way dynamic. Because it is objective and isn’t based on individual perception (which is capable of wavering) truth is not easy to perceive. It’s an alignment rather than perception.

Paraphrasing Mark Passio on truth:

“It doesn’t matter if no one sees it, no one knows it, or no one wants to know it. Truth is simply that which is.”

“The truth is absolute, and this idea clashes with the people’s ego, since this one loves relativism.

“Perception is not reality, but only looking through a filter. What is there is always the same, but the perception is what is changing.

Diagram taken from Mark Passio's thesis on Natural Law — Diagram taken from Mark Passio’s thesis on Natural Law

As the reader can see in the diagram above, there are three white lines that represent truth taking place.

Next, there are three sinusoidal lines which represent three different levels of perception in accordance with three different individuals. The wave with higher frequency, the blue one, is crossing the white line more times, and on the other hand there is a wave with less frequency, the red one, where it is possible to observe it crossing the white line just a few times, less than the others.

In conclusion, this means that the higher the personal frequency of the observer, the better ability to discern the truth and therefore the higher the consciousness. In that frequency one is closer to the truth. The higher the vibration / frequency, the better the ability to understand and recognise the patterns.

Non-violence at the expense of truth is a known tendency amongst Yoga practitioners. It is said that it is better not to say something that could possibly hurt someone, rather than to say it and create harm. The writer may agree with the previous statement, in the cases where information to be transmitted is irrelevant and harm is gratuitously done. In every other case, the writer always advocates for truth for the purpose of non-violence. Truth can be hard, but can never harm as much as a lie. With that in mind, it is paramount to note that in the increasingly politically correct society of nowadays, more often than not, what is being hurt is the ego of the individual. Consequently, an individual can perpetuate a lie only to avoid an uncomfortable moment.

For further comprehension, an example illustrates the concept.

A group of friends is about to go to a big party and one of them, blinded by current trends, wears an attire that doesn’t particularly suit her and could possibly be the cause for ridicule and mockery later on. At that moment, one of them honestly warns her friend not to use those clothes because they are bizarre and silly.

Understandably, a good advice from a friend can be hard to swallow in the moment, and even potentially challenge a friendship, but usually ends up as a priceless input. Although this is just a simple example, it demonstrates the significance of true statements regardless of their immediate outcome.

Frequently, insecure individuals avoid confrontation at the expense of their own wellbeing. This brings us to the next quality that anyone with integrity has: courage.

This section discusses the cases of conflict that emerge when an individual internally feels that something is not right, but, in contrast, externally complies with what he deems as wrong.

As Immanuel Kant puts it: “Do the right thing because it is right”.

Lack of courage can not only give way to any bully who obliviously steps on other’s heads, but at an individual level will always end up materialising as frustration, guilt and anger. All along the history there have been three types of men; those that don’t question, those that question but fear the consequences, and those that openly question despite the consequences. The first two groups are responsible for every tyranny in the past. The largest group in terms of numbers is the second one. In other words, that group hinders the potential for a change in the society. Lastly, the third group are those in charge of moving the wheel of evolution. These three groups base their decisions on the quantity of courage they individually possess, and their ability to overcome fear.

When an individual avoids confrontation, they are merely escaping from the inescapable. A problem ignored long enough becomes a bigger problem. For this reason, courage is treasured by most as a trait of integrity. Time and again “New Agers” fall into the trap of believing themselves to be “highly developed” merely because they are submissive and docile. These are nothing but traits of a coward. Accepting injustice and never resisting it positions any individual as an accomplice of the perpetrator by their own consent. As one can start to appreciate, courage to oppose whatever one believes to be wrong is not only a feature of integrity but it becomes a characteristic of a good-valuable person too. In the words of Aristotle himself:

“Courage is the first of human qualities because it is the quality which guarantees the others.”

Even though the virtues discussed above are pivotal to become a person of integrity, perhaps the first to be refined is the ability to discern. When living in an inverted world like nowadays, where illness is taken as health, immoral is taken as moral and vulgar is taken as gracious, the ability to discern becomes an arduous task. Just as a kid inherently knows what is right and what is wrong, an adult (a word coming from “adulterated”) has to work their way back, casting aside everything that is not belonging to them until they become pristine, unadulterated. With a myriad of distractions bombarding the minds of the population, discernment becomes truly challenging.

Maybe the biggest obstacle that hinders the clarity of the mind is our own belief system. Those teeny fragments of programming software make us decode reality in a predetermined fashion and consequently respond according to the program. In other words, we see the world through the lens of our beliefs as an individual sees the world as they would like it to be and not as it is.

Possibly, one of the most detrimental factors that block the ability to discern is ignorance. The term ignorance comes from the Latin verb “ignorare” which means “to not know something, even though necessary information is present, because that information has been wilfully refused or disregarded”. As the reader can derive, ignorance not only carry blame but its consequences can potentially be devastating. But let’s have a closer look into some aspects of the “ignorance-program”.

Indeed, a trend that promotes ignorance deflecting the true endeavour amongst the novice seekers is the New Age. Disguised as a genuine spirituality, the New Age movement favours its feel-good platitudes at expenses of the sincere effort and real inner work. One of its tenets states to “ignore the ‘negative’” under the justification of giving power to it if you bring your attention to. To ignore something deemed negative and then expect it to disappear is absolute nonsense. The more one knows, the better the choices one makes. Often, ignoring the “negative” is an emotional getaway to avoid see the truth.

Patanjali states in his Yoga Sutra I.33:

“In relationships, the mind becomes purified by cultivating feelings of friendliness towards those who are happy, compassion for those who are suffering, goodwill towards those who are virtuous, and indifference or neutrality towards those we perceive as wicked or evil”.

Here, Patanjali recommends an attitude of neutrality or indifference in regards to the “negative”. His statement is crystal clear: If you want to have a pristine mind don’t ignore the evil, but acknowledge it, and then take a stand of neutrality towards it. As the reader may conclude, ignoring facts, either “positive” or “negative” can be detrimental at a moment in which a choice has to be made.

As a final point on discernment, there is another tenet of the New Age Movement that is unfavourable to the development of a clear mind which is: “everything is Ok because we are all one”. The statement is partly true. Yes indeed, at a higher level all beings in the Universe form a unique conscious entity and consequently we all belong it. The first part of the statement, “Everything is Ok,” is where it misses the point. As a matter of fact, there are evil individuals on this planet doing heinous things, and this doesn’t make it acceptable. As one may presume, this mind-program belief creates submissive individuals that consent the inadmissible from a moral perspective and consequently perpetuating the wrongdoings of a few.

As the article is coming to an end, a recapitulation helps settling things down. A person of integrity is guided by perennial principles which are Universal through the ages, nations and cultures. Those principles, distilled from Nature itself and in harmony with it, are the frame in which integrity operates. While discernment is the capacity to correctly apply and move within these principles, courage is the spirit with which one drives themselves in the domain of impeccability. At any rate, there is a work that every person has to go through in order to gain clarity on moral and ethical qualities, discernment between right and wrong, a backbone to stand its ground, courage and the ability to say no. Without this work, man’s evolution comes to a point of standstill and society’s entropy impregnates with corruption. Those in search for Freedom know that there is only one way: to follow the Higher Laws because Freedom and morality are directly proportional.

As morality increases, freedom increases.

As morality declines, freedom declines.

The task of becoming a person of integrity is colossal but critical in these decaying times we are living in.

May the Truth ignite us all.

May Discernment cut deceit.

May Strength remain in You.

Can a weak person be a good person ? or the integrity and its intricacies

About the Author