Osho’s understanding of materialism is neither a simple endorsement nor a blanket rejection, but a careful differentiation between material possessions and a materialistic mindset. He criticizes materialism as a philosophy that reduces human life to the pursuit and accumulation of wealth and objects, regarding such obsession as a source of inner emptiness, anxiety, and suffering. At the same time, he does not praise poverty or deprivation as spiritual ideals, and he does not equate spirituality with a life that condemns the body, pleasure, or worldly comfort. For him, both crude materialism and life‑denying spiritualism are distortions that leave the human being divided and unfulfilled.

From this perspective, material well‑being is seen as a legitimate and even necessary foundation, but never as the ultimate goal. Osho holds that material pursuits are natural and acceptable, even enjoyable, provided they are not mistaken for the whole meaning of existence. Excessive attachment to possessions, and the attempt to find lasting happiness solely through external means, are viewed as serious obstacles to self‑realization. Without an awakening of consciousness through meditation and inner awareness, material success remains fundamentally unsatisfying and restless.

He therefore advocates a form of balance in which one “uses material things without being used by them.” This involves cultivating non‑attachment: enjoying comfort, wealth, and pleasure while not allowing them to define identity or dictate choices. In this vision, enlightened consciousness can engage fully with the material world without being enslaved by it, and spiritual growth does not require rejection of ordinary life. The problem, as he frames it, lies not in ownership but in clinging, not in comfort but in the mind that seeks fulfillment only through it.

Osho’s ideal is a synthesis in which outer prosperity and inner richness coexist without conflict. He rejects both the extreme of obsessive materialism and the extreme of harsh asceticism, regarding each as a one‑sided response that fails to honor the full range of human potential. Material comfort is welcomed as a supportive base, yet it is always subordinated to the deeper quest for awareness, meaning, and liberation. In this way, the material realm becomes a field for conscious living rather than an arena of blind pursuit or fearful renunciation.