There’s no law against living in an ashram, but officials may slow it down with lots of paperwork and excuses.
From the Discourses
Passages where Osho speaks to this question — each links to the complete discourse.
Beloved master, kindly let me know whether there is a law in india prohibiting indian citizens to inhabit, dwell or live in a house or houses or an ashram in any part of india, to study and lead a blissful human life for the growth of religion and science. If yes, then what is independence? If no, then why don't we start establishing a village for neo-sannyasins, "rajneeshdham," beyond municipal jurisdiction.?
But very cowardly ways, cunning ways... he remains a deputy collector. He is not worthy to be a prime minister to such a big country. His mind is that of a deputy collector -- a very small mind. I don't call him Morarji-bhai Desai, I call him Mediocre-ji-bhai Desai. My challenge is open. And even if he does not agree with me, then too there is no point in obstructing my work. Your agreement is not needed at all. That is the meaning of independence and democracy: people who cannot agree with each other can coexist. Otherwise what is the difference between a democracy and a dictatorial regime? I can exist, I have every right to exist, even if Morarji Desai does not agree with me. His agreement is not needed at all -- who cares? This is his problem. If he does not agree, so what? But if because…
Osho, on seeing your ashram I had the sense of another world. How meaningful is this in our country, India?
Poverty, wretchedness, India’s problems—all can disappear; only give India a right perspective to resolve them. Our problems are of our own making; therefore removing them is easy. Today there is such technological progress in the world that India has no need to remain poor. If we are poor, perhaps it is because we want to remain so; we are poor because our ways of thinking are foolish. We have the most beautiful land, the most beautiful sky. We are not short of talent either. But we have forgotten to honor talent. So whenever a talented person is born here, he too has to leave India. We have become adept at honoring the dull-witted. We have invented such criteria that only the dull-witted can qualify. Someone gets up at five in the morning—our respect! Someone does not smoke—our respect! Someone eats only greens—our respect! Someone wears khadi—our respect! Someone performs daily…
That was the problem for the American politicians. It became more problematic than Soviet Union, because Soviet Union is still poor. And the commune was becoming richer, because everybody was productive, and everybody was sharing. A commune of five thousand people had five hundred cars, five airplanes, one hundred air conditioned buses, and nowhere to go. Americans were coming and seeing and they were amazed, that how you had managed all this? And we had not asked any American to donate, we had not accepted any American donations. It was sannyasins themselves, whatsoever they had brought or produced by their work. Our success has been the problem. Q: WHAT DO YOU PLAN TO DO IN INDIA NOW? WILL YOU SET UP AN ASHRAM, BECAUSE RAJIV GANDHI'S GOVERNMENT HAS DENIED PERMISSION ONCE TO YOU; SO WILL YOU TRY AND RECREATE THIS ASHRAM IN INDIA? A: No.
Osho, in the Times of India of September 22, a news item from Indore said that India’s Prime Minister, Mr. Morarji Desai, expressed his strong dislike for Osho’s views on women and sex, and said that a permissive society ultimately brings about its own destruction. In this context he said that even in ancient India society once became permissive; the temples of Bhubaneswar and Puri built in the Kalinga period indicate this, and that is why the Kalinga empire disappeared. Osho, please be kind enough to comment on this statement of Mr. Morarji Desai.
Morarji cannot understand this. He does not even dare read my books. Laxmi went to see him with some of my books; he wouldn’t even take them in his hands. How will he understand me? He pronounces on me without knowing me. Whenever he sees someone in saffron—and there are many of my people across the land—he erupts. Many have told me: old acquaintances of his are now my sannyasins; when they go to see him he stiffens with anger: “You too got caught up in this racket!” Is it a racket—or freedom from the racket? Read, think, understand. He tells a sannyasin, “You too fell into this trap!” And what trap is he himself in? Twenty-four hours of whirling chaos—someone pulls his leg, someone his arm, someone runs away with the chair, locks are being hammered, Hanuman Chalisa chanted. He tells my sannyasin, “You are in a trap!” My…
Question: BELOVED OSHO, LOVE GIVES NAUGHT BUT ITSELF AND TAKES NAUGHT BUT FROM ITSELF. LOVE POSSESSES NOT NOR WOULD IT BE POSSESSED; FOR LOVE IS SUFFICIENT UNTO LOVE. WHEN YOU LOVE YOU SHOULD NOT SAY, "GOD IS IN MY HEART," BUT RATHER, "I AM IN THE HEART OF GOD." AND THINK NOT YOU CAN DIRECT THE COURSE OF LOVE, FOR LOVE, IF IT FINDS YOU WORTHY, DIRECTS YOUR COURSE. LOVE HAS NO OTHER DESIRE BUT TO FULFILL ITSELF. BUT IF YOU LOVE AND MUST NEEDS HAVE DESIRES, LET THESE BE YOUR DESIRES: TO MELT AND BE LIKE A RUNNING BROOK THAT SINGS ITS MELODY TO THE NIGHT. TO KNOW THE PAIN OF TOO MUCH TENDERNESS. TO BE WOUNDED BY YOUR OWN UNDERSTANDING OF LOVE; AND TO BLEED WILLINGLY AND JOYFULLY.