MN96 the Buddha states:
Brahmin, I don’t say that you should serve everyone, nor do I say that you shouldn’t serve anyone. I say that you shouldn’t serve someone if serving them makes you worse, not better. And I say that you should serve someone if serving them makes you better, not worse.
This sutta among others seems to support the Buddha respecting and recommending actual service of another as a way of not only honoring them but also as a way of ensuring that they teach you the dhamma.
https://dictionary.sutta.org/browse/s/sevana/ lists "service" as the "#2" definition behind "associating" and yet, translators have ruled this out so consistently? I am wondering if there is a Western bias at play here that is resistant to the Eastern concept of service? Or maybe the modern history of abuse between "gurus" and their disciples is a factor leading translator/scholars to discourage this kind of thing within the Buddhist world? Thank you for the opportunity to gain knowledge through this forum.