You can only truly give up riches after having them; saying you don’t want candy when you’ve never tasted it is just pretending.
From the Discourses
Passages where Osho speaks to this question — each links to the complete discourse.
Buddha, mahavira, krishna and rama -- they all talked of renunciation, but you say that wealth has to be increased. Why this contradiction?
It is true that I ask you to produce more wealth. It is now difficult to ascertain exactly what Buddha, Rama and Krishna had said But if they said that wealth need not be produced, then they were wrong. Talk of renunciation on the part of those who have no wealth is ridiculous. What would they renounce? Buddha could talk of renunciation because he was born in an affluent family. Buddha could afford to leave Yashodhara, his wife, behind, and move to the forest to live the life of an ascetic, because he knew that Yashodhara had a palace and every other means of security that one needs. But if a Buddha of the present times leaves his Yashodara a for twelve years, then at the end of twelve years he will find Yashodhara in some brothel and not in her home. Buddha could leave his son. Rahul, behind. because…
Osho, you often say that material prosperity is the foundation of spiritual growth; but in your last discourse on non-possession you said that the fewer things one has, the less enslaved one is, and the more things one has, the more enslaved one becomes. Please clarify this fundamental paradox between prosperity and non-possession, and also explain how more things make a person more enslaved. And how does the possessor become possessed?
Material prosperity is the foundation of spiritual life, but a building is not raised by the foundation alone. It can happen that the foundation is there and the house is never built. A house never exists without a foundation, but a foundation can exist without a house. One may lay the footings and leave them filled in—then there will be a foundation, not a building. But wherever there is a building, it cannot be without a foundation. Prosperity is the base of detachment. Without becoming prosperous, no one ever really discovers that prosperity is futile. Without having wealth, no one ever realizes that nothing essential is gained by wealth. The greatest gift of wealth is not wealth—it is the breaking of the illusion about wealth; it is disillusionment. If wealth is never attained, its futility is never known. The poor, the needy, the destitute find it very hard to be…
Osho, is there really absolutely no place for renunciation in your religion? The question arises because since I came in contact with you, many things in my life have dropped away. I cannot even relate to my old self.
Renunciation can teach you to drop sex, to drop tasteful food, to drop clothes, to be naked, to drop all possessions -- but in a strange way you will remain attached to all those things. When I was in Bombay, a Hindu monk came to see me; he had a disciple with him and he wanted to know what kind of meditation would be suitable for him. I told him, "Tomorrow morning we are meeting near the beach and we will be doing the meditation. It is better that you come there because it is a question of a practical experience." He said, "It will be very difficult for me to come tomorrow. The day after tomorrow I can come." I said, "What is the problem with tomorrow?" He said, "The problem is that my disciple has some work tomorrow morning, he cannot come." But I said, "Let him do…
Beloved Osho, how is it that all the past buddhas expressed themselves against money and sex, which are the sources of worldly pleasures? You are perhaps the first buddha to stand by all of them together -- pleasure, happiness, and bliss -- which is causing so much misunderstanding and opposition in your case. Did the past buddhas try to compromise with tradition and to play for safety?
Naturally, Maitreya, those who are clinging to the old buddhas are going to be against me, because their whole point is that the world is sin and it has to be renounced. Pleasure is sin and it has to be renounced -- even simple pleasures like drinking a cup of tea are sins. In Mahatma Gandhi's ashram, people used to drink tea, hiding. And once in a while somebody was caught, and he was so condemned that Mahatma Gandhi would go on a fast. This is a special way of torturing people. And the whole ashram would torture the person: because you drank tea, Mahatma Gandhi has gone on a fast unto death. And he would never say that it is a punishment for you. He would say, "It is a punishment for myself, because it shows that my soul is not pure enough; that's why my disciples go on…
Question: BELOVED OSHO, THEN SAID A RICH MAN, SPEAK TO US OF GIVING. AND HE ANSWERED: YOU GIVE BUT LITTLE WHEN YOU GIVE OF YOUR POSSESSIONS. IT IS WHEN YOU GIVE OF YOURSELF THAT YOU TRULY GIVE. FOR WHAT ARE YOUR POSSESSIONS BUT THINGS YOU KEEP AND GUARD FOR FEAR YOU MAY NEED THEM TOMORROW? AND, TOMORROW, WHAT SHALL TOMORROW BRING TO THE OVER-PRUDENT DOG BURYING BONES IN THE TRACKLESS SAND AS HE FOLLOWS THE PILGRIMS TO THE HOLY CITY? AND WHAT IS FEAR OF NEED BUT NEED ITSELF? IS NOT DREAD OF THIRST WHEN YOUR WELL IS FULL, THE THIRST THAT IS UNQUENCHABLE? THERE ARE THOSE WHO GIVE LITTLE OF THE MUCH WHICH THEY HAVE -- AND THEY GIVE IT FOR RECOGNITION AND THEIR HIDDEN DESIRE MAKES THEIR GIFTS UNWHOLESOME. AND THERE ARE THOSE WHO HAVE LITTLE AND GIVE IT ALL.