I am struggling with what appear to be genitives (or datives) in SN 22.99, which, per Ven. Sujato's translation, says:
As an example, SN 12.2 says, per Ven. Sujato:“Mendicants, transmigration has no known beginning.
“Anamataggoyaṁ, bhikkhave, saṁsāro.
No first point is found of sentient beings roaming and transmigrating, hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving.
Pubbā koṭi na paññāyati avijjānīvaraṇānaṁ sattānaṁ taṇhāsaṁyojanānaṁ sandhāvataṁ saṁsarataṁ.
Suppose a dog on a leash was tethered to a strong post or pillar. It would just keep running and circling around that post or pillar.
Seyyathāpi, bhikkhave, sā gaddulabaddho daḷhe khīle vā thambhe vā upanibaddho tameva khīlaṁ vā thambhaṁ vā anuparidhāvati anuparivattati;
I assume about SN 12.2 & SN 22.99:And what is rebirth?
Katamā ca, bhikkhave, jāti?
The rebirth, inception, conception, reincarnation, manifestation of the aggregates, and acquisition of the sense fields of the various sentient beings in the various orders of sentient beings.
Yā tesaṁ tesaṁ sattānaṁ tamhi tamhi sattanikāye jāti sañjāti okkanti abhinibbatti khandhānaṁ pātubhāvo āyatanānaṁ paṭilābho.
(a) sattānaṁ, khandhānaṁ & āyatanānaṁ are plural genitives; and the sentence says about these genitives: the beings' (their) rebirth, inception, conception & reincarnation; their aggregates' manifestation; their sense fields' acquisition
(b) anuparidhāvati and anuparivattati are verbs
Therefore, my questions are:
1. Why are there so many genitives in the sentence: pubbā koṭi na paññāyati avijjānīvaraṇānaṁ sattānaṁ taṇhāsaṁyojanānaṁ sandhāvataṁ saṁsarataṁ?
2. How do these genitives relate to each other?