What about the multiplication of the Jewish people? After all, if each generation is twenty years, then after ten generations it’s really not that hard to accept such a number of people.
And that would mean that at the time of the Exodus, the Jewish people were almost a tenth of the total world population, which was around 50 million people.
And even at the time of the Exodus, there’s no necessity that the power that existed then in Egypt had to collapse—that’s not mandatory.
Overall it sounds reasonable to me. What does the Rabbi think about that?

As for the multiplication of the people of Israel, the calculation does not seem very reasonable. There is an article in the journal Higayon (I think by Eliyahu Beller) that does the math according to different models. The topic has already been discussed here on the site, and possibilities were raised that these are typological numbers (although the Torah gives numbers that look precise). Search here on the site.

I searched the site, and the only thing I really had difficulty with was the number of firstborns.
But one could answer that in most families the women and the elderly were born before the military-age men, and therefore they are not firstborns, aside from those 22,000 firstborns in the Torah verses.
Assuming there is no difficulty there, then the matter of accelerated natural growth also isn’t hard, since overall, if we claim that the Jewish people numbered 2.5 million, then over ten generations each family would have had to bear 5.7 children on average.
What does the Rabbi think—is that possible?

After all, we’re talking about one son from each family, so all the firstborns could potentially be around 100,000 people; together with the women and the elderly men and women (who are potentially firstborns), let’s say there are 280,000 people total together with the men, so the chances of being firstborn are lower among the men.

It sounds like science fiction. Take into account life expectancy, infant mortality among a slave population in Egypt, fertility and infertility, and so on.

I meant that among the military-age men there could be 100,000 firstborns.
For the women, elderly men, and elderly women (who are potentially firstborns), there would be 180,000 people total in their favor, let’s say, so the likelihood of firstborn status would favor them more than the military-age men.
So it may be possible to say that in practice only one-eighth of the military-age men were firstborns.

See further here http://forum.otzar.org/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=13568#p126797 and onward.

How do we know there wasn’t miraculous birth increase through natural means? Why is it so hard to claim that each woman over the course of her 70-year life managed to bring at least 6 children into the world? If so, the issue of infertility and mortality doesn’t affect things that much, since in any case we would reach several million after 10 generations.
And in the Bible, Exodus chapter 1 verse 7 straightforwardly describes enormous multiplication, so maybe there was divine providence through natural means?

What does the Rabbi think about the assumption Nachmanides raises regarding the problem of the firstborns? There he writes that perhaps the firstborns are those who were born in the final year before the Jewish people left Egypt; and then he retracts it on the grounds that it’s impossible that so many firstborns were born in one year.
If we assume the enormous multiplication is possible—then perhaps what Nachmanides initially suggested about the number of firstborns in that year is also possible?
According to Eliyahu Beller’s article, he compared “Sanctify to Me every firstborn, every opener of the womb” with “in place of every firstborn, every opener of the womb among the children of Israel”—from here it would follow that we are speaking about firstborns who fit the definition of “opener of the womb,” and not those for whom some time had already passed and they were no longer in that “fresh” definition.
Thanks in advance.

I don’t have an opinion about such possibilities. If there was a miracle, then there’s no point in all the calculations. What I wrote was that by natural means it is plainly unreasonable.

There is a possibility that the numbers are typological. That is also the view of Dr. Joshua Berman in his article “Who’s Afraid of the Exodus from Egypt?”

According to what is written, there was abundant and enormous childbirth, to the point that it constituted a threat to Pharaoh and Egypt—quantitatively, of course, not qualitatively—so one can say that the Jewish people were already numerous relative to Egypt then.
Even if we don’t claim there was a direct miracle—can we say that there was self-sacrifice on the part of every woman to bear at least six children in her lifetime, and the Holy One, blessed be He, simply arranged that indeed every woman made the effort to have children? After all, the plain meaning of the text does not prevent this and even fits it.

And another question for the Rabbi: the Rabbi answers that perhaps the number is typological, and elsewhere he relates to the question about precise numbers and not rounded “thousands,” and admits that the question is valid and difficult and runs against the typological idea. Later in the responsa I didn’t see the Rabbi address the matter any further. I would be glad if the Rabbi could explain his position to me again, if it’s not a bother.
If the issue remains an open question without an answer, then what does that say regarding the Torah verses and the tradition that the entire Torah was written prophetically by Moses our Teacher? How does the Rabbi deal with this issue in relation to the Torah?
Thanks again.

From what it seems to me in interpreting the verses that say “and they multiplied and swarmed and became exceedingly, exceedingly mighty,” this comes to teach us that they were all fertile. It’s not important how many children they brought into the world, but rather that apparently they lived longer and did not die off quickly. The miracle was that even though the children of Israel were slaves, the women continued to bear children despite knowing that their sons would be slaves. How is that a miracle? Because they were blessed, as it is written: “and your offspring shall be as the dust of the earth,” and “as the stars of heaven.” And it is written, “you shall surely know that your offspring will be strangers in a land not theirs, and they will enslave them and oppress them four hundred years.” But afterward they left Egypt with great wealth and merited to receive the land promised to Abraham’s offspring.

In practice, the Egyptians’ fear was not the increase of Israel by itself, but rather their joining with Egypt’s enemies, as they said: “and he too may join our enemies.”
And the midrashim speak at length that the Egyptians knew about the faith-based Exodus of the children of Israel, and therefore they tried to kill the savior of the children of Israel, but the savior grew up דווקא in Pharaoh’s house. And that is an open miracle.

Itai, I don’t understand where this discussion is going. You can say anything that seems reasonable to you. What are you asking me?
About the typology, I said what I had to say. I don’t understand the question: either there was a miracle or there is some other explanation (as I said, the typological one does not seem reasonable to me).

If I understood correctly, the Rabbi holds:
It is hard to explain that there was natural increase, and it is also hard to say that the number is typological—so does the Rabbi hold that this is a difficulty with no answer for now (and that, God willing, the difficulty will be answered)?
I’m asking this because if there is no answer to this topic, to which many Torah verses were devoted (including the question of the small number of firstborns and of the tribe of Levi), then how are we supposed to relate to the reliability of the Torah?
On the one hand, there is no doubt that there was revelation (for other reasons the Rabbi gives), but on the other hand, the Torah that was given in revelation is rather “shaken.”
Thank you very much.

Itai, regarding the number of firstborns—there is an article about this by Rabbi Elchanan Samet in one of his books, and your thirst will be quenched.

Regarding typological numbers in the non-round parts—see Cassuto’s book Commentary on the Book of Exodus, and also on the Mavraham site on Noah in the Genesis portions. To the best of my recollection, I once also saw a suggestion by Kitchen, but I don’t remember it at the moment.

Ibn Ezra somewhere calculates that 1/73 of the population among the Jewish people were firstborns. And likewise, unrelatedly, the firstborns of the tribe of Levi were (if I’m not mistaken) 1/73 of the tribe. The “typological editor” worked hard.

To M, thanks for the reply; indeed I already read the articles you mentioned.
But still, I asked according to the view of Rabbi Michael Abraham, who is not satisfied with either a natural or a typological explanation, when there is still no answer to the difficulty: how are we supposed to relate to the reliability of the Torah when there is no explanation for these difficult verses?

Itai,
It’s not clear to me why you are getting so worked up over a question whose answer you do not know, and thinking as if everything stands or falls on this side question.
Someone who accepts the Torah does not do so because he has an answer to the question of the firstborns, or to every other specific question.
Are there not plenty of questions you don’t know how to answer? Rabbi Akiva Eger has dozens of questions on the Talmud and the medieval authorities that he left as requiring further study.

As for your personal interest in me, if this were bothering me I would look for material and then I could send you the articles you were referred to. Apparently it doesn’t really bother me.