it's nice knowing the quote in a larger context and i can see how belief in karmic reincarnation would prescribe such a proverb. of course, us westerners are more into "instant karma" and would in no way ever put up with abuse like a trained elephant.
The language is metaphoric, after all. The point being, people can't control themselves, but I'll endure their behavior. The "abuse" (and notice that it's in the form of "harsh words" on the human end of the analogy) could just as easily be some nasty comment from your spouse or your boss yelling at you or screaming kids or whatever. In short, stuff that makes you miserable. The First Noble Truth in Buddhism: "Life is suffering." The passage is trying to get folks to train themselves to deal with their suffering- however great or however small it is. (And let's face it, even minor troubles seem huge at times-- hence Aramaki's comment to Togusa, that most of us are neither as happy nor as miserable as we think we are.)
however, spiritual discipline is universal--turn the other cheek if smote and all that jazz...not with the belief that there would be something to be instantly gained...but there seems to be a focus on a more patient reward...it's all about he greater, unseen goal...
Buddhists don't view the goal as a reward, as the Self would cease to exist once you reached the goal. And you can't reach the goal if you're thinking about it as a reward- as that would tie the Self to the idea or mental image of a reward, and that would prevent you from extinguishing the Self.
(Admittedly, some schools of Buddhism are at odds with this position and claim that we all achieve Nirvana when we die-- after this lifetime, in other words-- or will eventually achieve Nirvana someday, but this hardly makes it a reward- as "you" cease to exist
as you- or as anything, really. Anything but Pure Being, which has no Self. And which is Pure Nothingness. It's hard to articulate in words. Basically, Nirvana isn't anything that we can think as existence-- or conceptualize at all. No dualities, no dichotomies, no differences. No way to measure it, or even describe it. The world
is that way, but it
acts as if it's a bunch of separate parts, and those parts think they're separate things. So those parts suffer. Extinguish thought and feeling, and you become One. Which is to say, Nothing. And Everything.)
(Some schools would argue that your Buddha Nature- that part of yourself whose existence you can't grasp or conceive of- becomes One with Nirvana. Others deny this, and claim that Buddha Nature is itself Nothing, by virtue of
being part of the One. There have been debates about this sort of thing for a long time... but such doctrinal debate isn't particularly relevant to this particular discussion.)
Once you attain release from
samsara, rewards and punishments would no longer exist, because the Self would no longer exist, so rewards and punishments couldn't be experienced.
it's hard to see motoko as transcendant because she is just a hybridized collective of 1s and 0s bouncing around electronic pathways...she is far from immortality as any EMP could prove, but symbolically, she is a guardian angel...and represents one who made the transformation to the oneness of nirvana.
She is transcendent, in that she has transcended her humanity. She hasn't achieved Nirvana, as she would cease to be if she had. Once you achieve Nirvana, you can't act, because "you" don't exist. At all. It's not a matter of changing states, it's a matter of ceasing to be. Period.
I think you're assuming godlike or transcendent things can't die... which hasn't always been the prevailing viewpoint, even in the West. (Look at Norse deities, for example. A whole lot of death in that scenario.) And it's not always the case with Eastern deities.
For a moment, remember that "Nirvana" literally means "extinguished", as in the extinguishing of Self-- personality, etc. The stuff you think of
as you. Contrast this term with
samsara, which is "flowing". To become One, you have to cease "existing" in any meaningful way. The Self- which flows- is extinguished. There is no "you" to perceive anything. You'd be One with all things, and you'd be Nothing (as all things are, in fact, forms of Nothing, and Nothing is Everything-- it's all One-- to Buddhists).
(Motoko fused with Project 2501, but not with everything that was, is, and shall be. Which is what Nirvana implies.)
Many Buddhist traditions- or traditions which have fused with or been influenced by Buddhism- have deities who are more than human (or at least
different from humans) but haven't achieved Nirvana, or are extensions/projections of the perceiving Self (to conceive of a god is to think of one's own desires or fears)-- or both, as all things are One, and that Oneness only appears to be a manifold existence. Motoko is simply something with more awareness-- or a different kind of awareness-- than humans. She's obviously not One in the sense of having achieved Nirvana-- as she has to enter a gynoid body to perform physical acts, and has a Self that can do such a thing. After achieving Nirvana, she wouldn't be able to "do" anything, really. "She" would just Be/Not Be in the purest possible way(s). Which are the same thing. It's all One.
I suppose one might make a case for her being a bodhisattva-type figure, but I think that'd be pushing it. Maybe in an allusive way... but not literally.
The passage from the
Dhammapada is about training oneself, training one's mind- to free yourself from karma, so you can be free of
samsara, so you can achieve Nirvana. But that
particular passage is simply addressing being ethical, having right thoughts, perceptions, etc. Training yourself. A particular step on the path. That's it, really. Nothing too deep.