In this previous question, I listed the results of my investigations into how each nidana (link) in dependent origination appears to be 'singular', except 'sankhara', which is plural.
The 'jati' ('birth') link also appears to be singular. However, what is unusual about it is the singular 'birth' that occurs appears to have 'plural' components. It is translated as follows by Bhikkhus Bodhi, Thanissaro & Sujato:
Katamā ca, bhikkhave, jāti (singular)? Yā tesaṃ tesaṃ sattānaṃ (plural) tamhi tamhi sattanikāye (plural) jāti sañjāti okkanti abhinibbatti khandhānaṃ pātubhāvo āyatanānaṃ paṭilābho.
And what, bhikkhus, is birth? The birth of the various beings (sattānaṃ) into the various orders of beings, their being born, descent, production, the manifestation of the aggregates, the obtaining of the sense bases. This is called birth. (Bodhi)
And what is birth? Whatever birth, taking birth, descent, coming-to-be, coming-forth, appearance of aggregates, & acquisition of [sense] media of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called birth (Thanissaro).
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. (Sujato)
Now, each link of Dependent Origination appears to apply to the sense experience of an individual. Or, alternately, the Buddhaghosa interpretation over 3 lifetimes appears to be about the reincarnation of an individual.
This being so, why does 'birth' ('jati'), seemingly a singular process, seem to refer to the birth (yā jati) of multiple beings (sattānaṃ) into the multiple orders/groups of beings (sattanikāye)? Why is the plural Pali word 'sattānaṃ' contained in the definition of what appears to be a singular process called 'jati' ('birth') in Dependent Origination?