hryciuk wrote:Are the Balinese Om and Ganesha compatible together from a Buddhist perspective?
From a traditional Theravada Buddhist perspective, both things are "out of scope" to the extent that neither are aspects of the Dhamma taught by the Buddha.
Being "out of scope" in such a way, there is no traditional perspective on them... neither am I aware of the Buddha addressing the matter of tattoos either.
What is the final conviction that comes when radical attention is razor-edge sharp? That the object of the mind is mind-made (manomaya). (Ven. Ñāṇananda)
Having understood name-and-form, which is a product of prolificity,
And which is the root of all malady within and without,
He is released from bondage to the root of all maladies,
That Such-like-one is truly known as 'the one who has understood'. (Snp 3.6)