“Love is beautiful.” Possession is ugly.” — Osho
You know that one friend who is resistant to commitment? Who abandons you at the first sign of emotional commitment? Yeah, Osho was not that. He was afraid of ownership, not love. And this is the real reason he never married.
The Marriage Myth.
Most people regard marriage as a social checklist: get educated, obtain a job, marry, grow old, and die weary. But Osho was never the “normal” type of guy. He questioned everything, including religions, governments, traditions, and the institution of marriage. He saw marriage not as a sign of love, but as a pact of control, a mechanism for society to confine two free spirits to regular routines. He didn’t want something predictable. He desired independence. So, when they asked him, “Why don’t you marry?” He essentially stated (in his own lyrical rage):
“Why would I marry love when I can live it freely?”
That statement alone would make a philosopher blush and a mother clutch her pearls.
The Philosophy Behind It
Here is the core: Osho thought that love should be like breathing: spontaneous, effortless, and flowing. Marriage, to him, felt like breathing through a paper bag. He saw marriage as society’s attempt to create something eternal from something intrinsically transient. Love transforms. People change. Feelings shift. Nonetheless, we anticipate a single legal document to keep the unpredictable secure. Osho despised the delusion. He said:
“Marriage is society’s trick to kill love politely.”
He wasn’t against love; he was against institutionalized love. Love is a contract. Love is an obligation. He desired love as a conscious, ever-renewing choice.
A Man Married to Freedom.
Now, let’s be clear: Osho was not some hermit hiding in a cave, denying human feelings. He spoke openly about love, sexuality, relationships, and even want. He encouraged people to experience intimacy consciously, without guilt, control, or fear. He said:
“If love becomes bondage, it is worse than hate.”
That’s the thinking that rendered him unmarryable. He did not reject connection; he rejected ownership. He wanted to connect rather than possess. He wished to love but not belong to anyone. He was, in the most radical sense, a guy who had wedded freedom itself.
The Psychological Angle: Osho’s Genius or Egotism?
Not married offered Osho emotional and spiritual independence. Marriage grounds people—sometimes brilliantly, sometimes painfully. However, it also connects your identity to another’s. And for someone like Osho, whose identity was based on his message, disobedience, and teaching, it would have been like clipping his own wings. Marriage requires compromise. Compromise is the final word in a rebel’s dictionary. He was not designed for “half measures.” He wanted the entire sky, not just a portion of it. He frequently said,
“You cannot love truth and belong to anyone. Truth demands your totality.”
So maybe that’s why he couldn’t belong to anyone—he already belonged to something much bigger.
The Cultural Backlash
Of course, declaring “marriage is bondage” in a country like India is like slamming tradition in the face. Osho not only rejected marriage, but he dismantled, dissected, mocked, and referred to it as “legalized prostitution” several times. That infuriated folks. Religious conservatives labeled him immoral. Politicians labeled him dangerous. His novels were prohibited from their houses by his parents. Many people, however, were secretly fascinated. Because, deep down, everyone has wondered: “What if love could exist without marriage?” Osho expressed something that most people would not dare to think aloud. That is why he was both loved and despised in equal measure.
Was he afraid of intimacy?
Let’s switch the lens for a second. Could it be that Osho avoided marriage because he was afraid of the vulnerability that comes with it? Possible. He was smart, yet brilliance is sometimes associated with detachment. His entire life was dedicated to investigating connection itself. So, perhaps his philosophy was more than just a teaching tool; it could also be a form of self-defense. Because unfettered love entails the constant possibility of heartbreak. And he didn’t want to be owned; perhaps he also didn’t want to be broken. But this is guesswork, and Osho was too self-aware to hide behind excuses. He would have remarked, “Even heartbreak is beautiful if it happens in freedom.”
The Practical Side
Osho’s lifestyle made marriage impossible. He lived in communes, traversed the world, and addressed millions. He wasn’t the kind to come home, eat dal-chawal, and fight over who forgot to pay the power bill. His life was not designed for two. It was a storm, but marriage feeds on routine. So, instead of a single lover, he had thousands of disciples, each loyal, in love, and pulled to his energy. It’s as if he was in spiritual polyamory with the universe. You don’t sign marriage paperwork if your spouse already exists.
Lessons Hidden in His Choice
Now, before you text your lover, “Osho said marriage kills love, so I’m out,” just wait. Osho’s refusal to marry does not indicate a disdain of relationships. It’s difficult to love without property. Love without fear of losing. To love without using another person as a safety net. He wanted people to experience love as a state of being rather than a transaction. It is not about shattering marriages; it is about breaking the illusions we place on them. Because if your love is contingent on a document, it is not love. It is insurance.
Osho refused to marry because he did not believe that love could be owned by two individuals. To him, marriage was a bargain struck by the insecure to keep love from dying — and in doing so, they suffocated it. He favored freedom above company, truth over comfort, and awareness over social acceptance. Whether you agree or disagree, you must recognize the courage required. Because most people die attempting to conform to systems. Osho spent his life attempting to break them, which could explain why he never said, “I do.”
