Marriage has traditionally been seen as one of the ultimate milestones in life. It’s celebrated in most cultures as the pinnacle of romantic success, a bond meant to last a lifetime. However, in recent years, more people have questioned this notion. A significant shift is happening in how people view marriage, freedom, and happiness. Many individuals are experiencing joy and contentment outside of marriage, leading them to question if traditional marital bonds are the best way to live.
I am delving into the complexities of relationships, comparing married life, cohabitation without marriage, and being single. It will explore why many people find themselves happier when the traditional confines of marriage do not bind them, why singles experience a higher sense of satisfaction, and how living freely (alone or with a partner) may be the key to true happiness and spiritual fulfillment.
The Rise of Happy Singles
For many, being single today is not synonymous with loneliness or sadness. Instead, many people have found a sense of liberation, joy, and self-discovery in singlehood. There’s a growing understanding that personal happiness doesn’t depend on another person. Modern singles embrace their independence and understand that self-love and individual growth are essential to true fulfillment.
One of the greatest joys of being single is the freedom it affords. Individuals can focus solely on themselves without the responsibilities and compromises of a romantic relationship. This autonomy means they can pursue their dreams, develop their interests, and explore life on their own terms. Singles can make decisions without consulting anyone, travel, work late without worrying about someone waiting at home, or focus on personal development without any constraints.
The idea that a relationship will bring happiness can be misleading. The emotional toll of being in a relationship can often overshadow the perceived benefits. Singles often experience better mental health as they are not constantly navigating relationship dynamics, conflict resolution, or stress associated with marriage. The freedom to prioritize their needs can lead to more balanced lives and emotional well-being.
Additionally, single people can build stronger social networks with friends and family. Rather than depending solely on one partner for emotional fulfillment, this broadening of emotional connections results in a more robust support system.
Being single allows for significant personal growth. You can engage in hobbies, learn new skills, and focus on your career or educational goals. This period of self-exploration and personal development helps build confidence and an understanding of what one truly wants from life. As a result, many singles are happy because they can find peace in their own company rather than relying on someone else for emotional or social fulfillment.
Happiness in Cohabitation Without Marriage
Another evolving trend is couples who live together without getting married. While traditionally frowned upon, this lifestyle has gained acceptance as more people have found it to be a fulfilling alternative to traditional marriage. Cohabitation allows couples to enjoy the companionship, intimacy, and emotional support of a committed relationship without the societal pressures and legalities of marriage.
Living together without the legal binding of marriage allows couples to explore their relationship without the pressure of societal expectations. There are no looming expectations about long-term commitment, no need for elaborate ceremonies, or pressure to fulfill certain traditional roles. Couples who cohabitate often experience greater emotional intimacy and closeness because the focus is on the relationship rather than external pressures.
Couples who live together can redefine their relationship based on their personal desires and goals. They don’t feel trapped by the formal obligations that a marriage might impose. This flexibility fosters creativity and mutual respect in relationships, allowing partners to grow together on their own terms.
Marriage is often portrayed as a grand union of love and commitment. However, the reality can be quite different. Many individuals find themselves entering into marriage under societal pressure, sometimes choosing to marry because it feels like the next logical step in a relationship rather than a conscious decision to commit to another person for the long term. Marriage can sometimes feel like a societal trap—an expectation that one must meet to be seen as “successful” or “complete.”
Couples who choose to cohabit without marriage avoid this societal trap. They are free from the pressures of living up to a “perfect” image of marital bliss. They can engage in a more genuine and authentic relationship, where love and partnership grow naturally, without the constraints that a formal marriage might impose.
The Constraints of Marriage: A Potential Prison
While marriage may seem like a beautiful symbol of love and commitment, many married people report feeling trapped in their relationships. The institution of marriage comes with responsibilities, obligations, and societal expectations that can make individuals feel constrained and limited. The idea of marriage as a prison is not as extreme as it may seem. For many, the constraints of marriage are real and can lead to dissatisfaction and unhappiness.
One of the primary reasons people feel trapped in marriage is the loss of personal freedom. Marriage often involves compromises, sacrifices, and a constant balancing act between individual desires and the relationship’s needs. When two people decide to marry, they are expected to merge their lives in a way that sometimes feels suffocating. The personal space and freedom once enjoyed as individuals are often diminished, replaced by the pressures of keeping the marriage intact.
This loss of freedom can be distressing for individuals who value their independence. The constant emotional investment, the need to prioritize someone else’s needs, and the inability to pursue personal desires freely can make marriage feel like a cage. A lack of autonomy can lead to resentment, dissatisfaction, and unhappiness.
Marriage often brings with it a set of expectations—whether societal or personal. These expectations can be about maintaining a “perfect” home, achieving a particular lifestyle, or fulfilling certain gender roles within the household. The pressure to meet these expectations can create feelings of inadequacy and frustration.
For many, marriage means the loss of the spontaneity and freedom that comes with single life. The daily grind of managing household responsibilities, raising children, or fulfilling social roles can become overwhelming. The strain of constantly trying to meet external expectations while dealing with personal desires creates a paradox of being “together” and yet feeling emotionally distant or restricted.
In many ways, marriage can be perceived as a trap—one that individuals enter under social or familial pressure, believing it will bring them happiness, but ultimately feeling constrained by the reality of the institution. This can lead to unhappiness, disillusionment, and, in some cases, a desire for divorce. People who feel trapped in their marriages often yearn for the freedom to explore their identities, find peace within themselves, and live on their terms.
The Importance of Inner Peace and Freedom
The essence of human existence is the search for inner peace and happiness. For many individuals, the key to finding this peace is personal freedom. Whether single or living in a non-marital partnership, the freedom to choose one’s path without external interference is essential for the soul’s well-being.
From a spiritual perspective, humans are often seen as free souls searching for fulfillment and enlightenment. Marriage rules and expectations can often cloud one’s ability to achieve this freedom. The desire for inner peace and personal fulfillment is best achieved when people are free to make their own choices, develop their own spiritual practices, and pursue their own paths without being confined by societal norms.
Many people find that marriage interferes with their spiritual journey. When individuals cannot explore their spirituality or engage in practices that bring them peace, their souls may become restless. True happiness, from a spiritual perspective, comes from alignment with one’s higher self—something difficult to achieve when constantly bound by the demands of a marital relationship.
At the core of the human desire for happiness is freedom—the freedom to live without constraints, make choices that align with one’s soul, and experience life fully. Whether single, cohabiting, or married, people who find freedom in their relationships experience higher joy and satisfaction. For many, the true happiness that eludes them in marriage can be found by embracing freedom—freedom from societal expectations, freedom to grow as an individual, and freedom to live authentically.
The marriage, cohabitation, and single life debate is complex and deeply personal. However, the rising trend of happier singles and unmarried couples suggests that the traditional view that marriage is the ultimate path to happiness is being challenged. Many people are discovering that true happiness comes from personal freedom, emotional independence, and the ability to live a life without the constraints of traditional societal norms.
Whether through the joy of being single, the freedom of cohabitation without marriage, or the need for spiritual growth, people are beginning to understand that happiness lies in pursuing inner peace rather than meeting external expectations. For some, marriage can actually feel like a trap—a trap that limits personal growth and the ability to achieve true freedom. For others, the journey to spiritual fulfillment and happiness can mean letting go of the conventional and embracing the freedom to live on their own terms.
Why did Osho never marry?
Osho, born Chandra Mohan Jain and later known as Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh, is one of the most controversial and influential spiritual figures of the 20th century. His teachings challenged conventional societal norms and redefined spirituality, love, and personal freedom. One aspect of his personal life that has intrigued many is his decision never to marry. To understand this choice, it is essential to delve into his broader philosophy, which critiqued traditional institutions and championed the liberation of the individual spirit.
Osho’s early life and eventual emergence as a spiritual teacher were marked by an ongoing quest for truth beyond the confines of conventional wisdom. His journey took him from academic pursuits in philosophy to becoming a charismatic leader whose teachings attracted followers worldwide. Central to his mission was the desire to break free from the patterns of human behavior that, in his view, hindered actual spiritual growth.
Osho believed that the structures imposed by society—especially those related to family, marriage, and social conformity—were obstacles to personal enlightenment. He argued that institutions such as marriage were built upon outdated notions of security, stability, and duty, which could often stifle the blossoming of one’s inner self. Instead of adhering to these traditional commitments, Osho chose a path of radical freedom that allowed him to focus entirely on exploring deeper realms of consciousness.
A pivotal part of Osho’s reasoning for never marrying lay in his understanding of marriage as a social construct. In many cultures, marriage is revered as the ultimate form of commitment and stability, a sacred bond that unites two individuals in a lifetime of companionship, responsibility, and, ideally, love. However, Osho critiqued this idealization by pointing out that the conventional institution of marriage often came with strings attached—expectations, compromises, and responsibilities that might bind an individual to a particular lifestyle or set of behaviors.
For Osho, marriage was not a spiritual union but rather an arrangement steeped in societal norms and the pursuit of stability at the expense of personal freedom. He questioned the necessity of lifelong commitments that could limit one’s ability to grow and explore the vast landscape of the inner self. According to his perspective, when marriage’s conventional roles and responsibilities bind an individual, the possibility of experiencing unconditional love and true self-realization diminishes.
Central to Osho’s teachings was the practice of Tantra—a complex and multifaceted spiritual tradition that emphasizes integrating physical, emotional, and spiritual experiences. Tantra, in the context of Osho’s interpretation, is not solely about sexuality; it is about embracing life in all its dimensions without repression or judgment. This comprehensive approach to existence requires an open mind and a willingness to experience life beyond the limits set by traditional morality and social expectations.
Osho’s dedication to Tantra reflected his larger vision: to dissolve boundaries between the sacred and the profane. He believed the rigid separation between spiritual pursuits and worldly pleasures was artificial. Instead of compartmentalizing life into “spiritual” and “mundane” parts, Osho taught that true enlightenment comes from embracing the totality of life. For him, marriage represented a division—a partition that separated the individual from the full spectrum of human experience.
By engaging deeply in Tantra, Osho sought to transcend the dualities that define conventional existence. In this framework, the bonds of marriage could be seen as another form of duality—a division between self and other, between freedom and duty. Osho’s focus was on fostering an inner freedom that allowed one to experience life unencumbered by external obligations, whether marital, familial, or societal.
One of Osho’s central critiques of marriage was that the institution promised a form of stability and security that, in reality, could lead to stagnation. He argued that while stability and security might be valuable in certain contexts, they often come at the cost of inhibiting personal growth. In a marriage, individuals may find themselves conforming to the expectations of their partner, family, or society, leading to self-censorship that dampens the spirit.
Osho believed that pursuing security could become an obstacle to discovering one’s true potential. Individuals settling into predefined roles may stop questioning the status quo and cease pursuing life’s more profound mysteries. For Osho, the liberation of the spirit required the willingness to let go of these illusions of permanence and certainty. He saw marriage as a temporary, worldly arrangement that might offer comfort but ultimately restricts the expansive journey of self-discovery.
In his view, real security does not come from external attachments but from the inner knowing and acceptance of one’s true nature. This inner security, he believed, was the cornerstone of true enlightenment—a state of being that is self-sustaining and not dependent on external validation or relationships. Thus, choosing to forgo marriage was a deliberate move towards cultivating a deeper sense of inner freedom and autonomy.
A fundamental tenet of Osho’s philosophy is the principle of non-attachment. This concept, rooted in Eastern spiritual traditions, teaches that attachment to worldly things—relationships, material possessions, or ideologies—can hinder spiritual growth. For Osho, non-attachment was not about renouncing life or love but about experiencing life fully without clinging to its transient forms.
In the context of marriage, non-attachment meant not being bound by the societal expectations and the emotional dependencies that often arise from such commitments. Osho maintained that by avoiding the traps of conventional attachment, an individual could engage with life more authentically and vibrantly. His personal choice to remain unmarried was an embodiment of this principle. It was a conscious decision to keep his inner self unburdened by the obligations and expectations of traditional partnerships.
This approach does not imply that Osho was against love or relationships in a general sense. On the contrary, he often spoke about the transformative power of love—if it is experienced in its pure, unconditional form. However, he saw that the institutional framework of marriage tended to distort this potential. By removing the labels, roles, and expectations that usually accompany marital relationships, one could experience love as a spontaneous, liberating force rather than a contract or duty.
Osho’s decision to remain unmarried was not merely a personal preference but a deliberate challenge to conventional societal norms. During his lifetime, traditional values regarding family and marriage were deeply entrenched in many cultures. Osho’s life and teachings directly confronted these norms. He questioned the validity of living life according to scripts handed down over generations without critical examination.
By choosing a path that deviated from the norm, Osho invited his followers to re-examine the constructs of their own lives. He urged them to question whether the conventions they adhered to truly served their growth and happiness or if they were merely inherited limitations. In this light, Osho’s celibacy in the traditional sense was less about personal sacrifice and more about a radical affirmation of individual freedom. He embodied the idea that one’s life should be a canvas for personal exploration and creativity, unconfined by the strictures of societal expectation.
It is important to understand that Osho’s rejection of marriage does not equate to disregarding responsibility or human connection. Instead, it highlights a nuanced perspective on balancing freedom and responsibility. Osho’s teachings often emphasized that true responsibility is not about adhering to external obligations but about being true to one’s nature and inner calling.
In his view, an individual’s responsibility should be directed inward—toward self-discovery, self-realization, and ultimately, contributing to humanity’s collective awakening. Marriage, as traditionally practiced, often comes with predefined responsibilities that might detract from this inner journey. Osho argued that when individuals invest their energy in societal roles at the expense of inner growth, they risk losing touch with the essence of who they truly are.
This perspective is not without its paradoxes. Many contend that relationships and commitments can catalyze personal growth by providing support, challenges, and opportunities for transformation. Osho acknowledged that human connection is a powerful force. However, he maintained that the marriage format, as it is conventionally understood, often prioritizes conformity over true individuality. Ultimately, he saw his choice as one that allowed him to explore the vast possibilities of inner freedom without the distraction of external commitments that might compromise that pursuit.
Osho’s teachings are deeply rooted in the ancient traditions of Eastern mysticism, where the notion of self-realization and inner freedom has long been a central theme. In many Eastern philosophies, the ultimate goal is to transcend the ego and the physical world’s limitations to attain a state of unity with the cosmos. This often requires detaching from the impermanent and superficial aspects of life, including many social constructs that govern modern society.
Marriage, as understood in the Western and even some Eastern contexts, is viewed by Osho as a microcosm of the worldly life that binds individuals to the cycle of desire, attachment, and ultimately, suffering. By renouncing the traditional form of marriage, Osho was aligning himself with a lineage of mystics who saw the world as a series of illusions (or “Maya”) that distract one from the ultimate reality. For him, the practice of Tantra and the pursuit of enlightenment were pathways to seeing beyond these illusions—into a realm where love, beauty, and spiritual truth are experienced without the encumbrance of conventional attachments.
Osho’s decision never to marry was emblematic of his more significant life’s work: challenging the status quo and urging individuals to seek a path that is uniquely their own. His legacy is multifaceted. On one hand, he is remembered as a gifted orator and a master of meditation techniques who helped countless individuals find new ways to perceive themselves and the world around them. On the other hand, his personal choices—such as his decision to remain unmarried—continue to spark debate and introspection among spiritual seekers and critics alike.
For many of his followers, Osho’s life was a living example of his teachings. His personal choices were not a rejection of human connection but a deliberate strategy to avoid the pitfalls of attachment that he saw as impediments to genuine self-realization. His life encourages us to question whether our societal norms—especially those regarding marriage and commitment—are truly in service of our highest potential or merely convenient constructs that limit our inner freedom.
In today’s world, Osho’s ideas have found renewed relevance. As many people question the traditional narratives around marriage and commitment, Osho’s perspective offers a radical alternative: that liberation and self-fulfillment might lie in rethinking these established norms. His life invites us to consider that the pursuit of spiritual freedom may sometimes require us to break away from the expectations placed upon us by society.
Osho’s teachings have also influenced contemporary discussions on the nature of relationships. In an era where individualism and personal growth are increasingly valued, many find resonance in the idea that relationships should evolve naturally rather than be bound by rigid structures. Whether one chooses to marry or not, the underlying message remains the same: that the journey inward toward a deeper understanding of oneself is paramount.
Moreover, Osho’s emphasis on non-attachment and the experiential nature of love challenges us to reframe our understanding of intimacy. Instead of viewing relationships solely as sources of stability and permanence, we can begin to see them as opportunities for mutual growth and self-discovery. His perspective encourages a dynamic interplay between freedom and connection—one where the bonds we form do not restrict us but instead serve as catalysts for exploring the full potential of our being.
Osho’s decision never to marry was much more than a personal lifestyle choice; it was a deliberate, philosophically driven stance against the traditional institution of marriage. By rejecting marriage, Osho sought to free himself from the limitations and attachments imposed by societal norms, thereby allowing him to fully immerse himself in exploring Tantra, meditation, and the broader quest for spiritual enlightenment.
His views on marriage, rooted in the belief that true spiritual freedom can only be achieved when free from external constraints, inspire admiration and debate. Osho’s life reminds us that the path to self-realization often requires us to challenge long-held beliefs and forge our own way—an approach that remains as relevant today as it was during his lifetime.
In summary, Osho never married because he saw the institution as a potential barrier to achieving the inner freedom and self-realization he championed. His life and teachings invite us to question the established norms and consider whether our commitments might limit our potential for personal and spiritual growth. Through his work, Osho encourages us to embrace life in its totality, seek truth beyond the confines of societal constructs, and ultimately experience love and spirituality in their pure, unadulterated forms.