Not sure I can agree with this, especially as a man. Essentially saying neuter and emasculate yourself , so the King will ride your ass for the rest of your life and you'll live a content life.
A lot of Buddhist advice becomes very strange when taken into a secular context. It feels like there's a sense in the West of Buddhism as "less religious" than other faiths because it's less engaged with a deity, but that's a misleading approach.
It's worth remembering that most Buddhist traditions don't expect enlightenment in one lifetime, and do believe in literal, bodily reincarnation based on your behavior in this life. I can't speak to this specific verse, but "best among men is one who endures abuse" is the sort of sentiment which is very different in a world where the one abused will be reincarnated and seeks an end to that cycle more than they seek present benefit. There are bits worth using in a secular context, but as with most faiths we should also expect some advice that's grossly wrong without its spiritual framework.
(This is also worth remembering when we talk about corporate Buddhist meditation retreats and the like. They seem to assume that if enlightenment is the death of desire and ego, a little Buddhism will be a decrease of greed and selfishness. There are a lot of Buddhist traditions which are very much not about that sort of linear progress.)
Had a lot of time to read this stuff. It goes pretty deep.
In fact there is one Sutta in the Pali Canon where one monk went around proclaiming consciousness as “self” or Atman and Gotama was pretty annoyed at him.
The tamed elephant isn't a metaphor for a man, it's literally an elephant.
The notion is you should endure the abuse of the elephant, rather than lash out at the king for reprehensible behavior.
The overall notion, regardless of whether it is a realistic one or not, is if we stop giving the gregarious attention they crave, it'll cease to be a valuable endeavor. Don't let the king rule you emotionally, and you'll never be their subject literally.
The alternative is revolt against the king. But violence begets violence. And the kings usually have the best weapons.
It's akin to Anarchisms "Rules without rulers".
If the elephant wanted, it could easily squash the king, regardless of him being a king or not.
A bird that has lived its life in a cage won't leave. It's really quite sad to see.
Men convince themselves they are free by refusing to ackowledge the walls of their own dungeon.
I'm not sure I understand the qualifier; do you think you'd be more likely to agree with this if you were a woman?