svArtha derivation and subtypes of taddhita pratyaya affixes

[Stefan Baums]

Dear Ulrich,

is there any chance that the derivation being discussed is not

    mitra/maitra → maitra

but

    mitra/maitra → maitraka/maitreya

(’byams pa being a possible Tibetan translation for both maitra 
and maitreya, though you don’t say what the Tibetan word for 
maitra is in your passage), and that mthun pa’i rkyen is just an 
unusual translation for taddhita (influenced by the meaning 
‘agreeable’ of hita)?

If Bhāvaviveka’s bdag gi don la de dang mthun pa’i rkyen is for 
svārthataddhitapratyaya, then I can sort of see how Avalokitavrata 
comes to explain the whole term as bdag dang mthun pa’i tshig gi 
rkyen ‘affix of a word agreeing with itself (in meaning)’ (taking 
svārthataddhita as a unit). Still, the step from commentary to 
subcommentary remains a bit peculiar. Is it possible that the 
Tibetan translation of Bhāvaviveka’s commentary was used alongside 
the Sanskrit original in the preparation of the Tibetan 
translation of Avalokitavrata’s subcommentary (similar to the 
Udānavarga / Udānavargavivaraṇa translation procedure as 
demonstrated by Michael Balk)?

Best wishes,
Stefan

-- 
Stefan Baums
Asian Languages and Literature
University of Washington