1. I don't think any of the vAggeyakAras (trinity) have made the bhairava-munIshwara conflation.
2. While all the books say aruNAmbud
a-nibha; I strongly feel it should be aruNAmbuj
There is no precedent in literature (that I've seen so far) where feet are compared to red clouds. ambuda is cloud and ambuja is lotus. There are countless examples with references to lotus-feet.
3. pAmara-pAvani pAvani is a redundancy (paunahpaunya) that the trinity weren't entirely free of; but avoided as far as possible. pAmara-pAlini pAvani seems to be a better reading.
aruNAmbuda nibha caraNAmbudhi sura muni
This is definitely an aberration. I even have a speculation about where it comes from. Our excessively devout singers have tendency in stick in 'amba!'-s in the middle of songs, wherever there is a longish pause. They all abhor vacuums and inject a bunch of amba-s, often in the middle of phrases.
I know of one particular instance of an amba! included in bAlagOpAla, the bhairavi song. Some calf in the vicinity of bAlagOpAla must have bellowed 'ambA' and it got incorporated ito the song.
The second ambudhi must be a metamrphosed amba, which is anyway an interpolation.
pAvana-mUrtivi is acceptable pAvani mUrtivi is wrong.
It seems funny that the aruNa caraNa SaraNa prasa isn't continued to the other caraNa.
Can someone explain the variation in Verse 6 of saundarya lahari, please?
What is the variation you allude to? Flowery bow and sugarcane bow?