Rene,

I believe there are a number of errors in your list of bahubbiihis. I
attempt to point out a few (though there can be more) in the below,
and along the way I provide a couple of tips that might help you gain
clarity in this question. I welcome corrections in the event of
mistakes.

>paa.nasama: lit: 'The same as life', hence: 'dear as life'

This is not a bahubbiihi.

>Ending in 'adjectives,' adverbs, past participles, ordinals, etc.:
>
>
>
>sammaapa.tipanna: rightly disposed, rightly seen

Not a bahubbiihi.

>
>rukkhapatitaa [kumaraa] (abl. Tp--> Bh)

Not a bahubbiihi.

One way you can test this is to see if the compound can be split up
like this: rukkhato patitaa kumaaraa. In this case you can do so
without changing the meaning, which _decisively_ shows it is not a
bahubbiihi. It is a plain old tappurisa.

Look what happens if you try to split up a real bahubbiihi like that:
mahaaseno viiro. *Mahaa seno viiro. Here we get an absurdity which
completely distorts the meaning.

To break up the latter you'd need to write something like: yassa
mahaasenaa atthi, so viiro (assuming the bahubbiihi was being used in
a longer sentence as an attributive adjective). This includes
precisely the idea of _possession_ that bahubbiihis convey.

>
>ara~n~navaasaa bhikkhuu (instr. Tp --> Bh)
>

This is a bahubbiihi but the final element is a noun (vaasa =
dwelling), not an adjective, adverb et. So it can not be taken as an
example of bahubbiihis supposedly ending in other word-classes than
nouns.

>
>
>
>sammaapa.tipannaa ariyaa: the noble ones who have rightly seen
>

Not a bahubbiihi.


best regards,

/Rett