Why Things First Got Worse When Moshe Appeared Before Pharoah

[edu]

One answer I would like to propose is based on the statement of Rashi and our sages that during the plague of darkness 80 percent of the Israeliltes were killed in a plague (hidden from the view of the Egyptians) because conditions had begun to improve in Egypt and they didn't want to leave.
If 80 percent had this viewpoint after going through the increased suffering when Pharoah took away their straw and demanded the same work output, imagine what percentage of the Israelites would have wanted to stay without going through this added persecution. Probably much higher.

If you would like to add an answer, you are invited to do so.

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

I do not think the 1/5 th only leaving thus 80% dying is a Pshat statement. In fact then their are mentioned figures 1 in 500 etc. etc. Their has to be another meaning to this as 600,000 men + their families would means their were at least 5 times that many people? (I know their is a medrash or Rashi that 6 came out at once but again their is more to this meaning).

[edu]

This is my reply to Tag-MehirTzedek
who wrote: 

I do not think the 1/5 th only leaving thus 80% dying is a Pshat statement.

The Bible tells us that after the first seven years of marriage, Yaakov (Jacob) had 4 wives that produced 11 sons and 1 daughter. His final son Binyamin was born several years later.
Approximately during the first 91 years in Egypt, give or take a year, the Israelites had it good in Egypt, because the Pharoah who did not know Yosef (Joseph) had not yet come to power.
So let us say that 60 out of the 70  from Yaakov's family that arrived in Egypt followed in their father's footsteps and within 7 years had multiple wives and 11 sons and an unknown amount of daughters. So after 25 years in Egypt the 60 would produce at least 660 sons. The recommended marriage age according to Pikei Avot is 18 so I chose to focus after 25 year in Egypt to allow the youngest of the 60 men under discussion to have 7 full years of marriage.
 After 50 years in Egypt those 660 sons would have produced at least 7260 sons (11*660). After 75 years the 7260 sons would have produced 79860 (7260*11). From that point in time, even if the amount of sons just doubled every 25 years (since conditions were no longer so favorable. We would have after 100 years in Egypt 159,720 sons (79860*2). At year 125 in Egypt (159720*2) 319,440 sons. At year 150 in Egypt we would have (319440 *2) 638,880. At year 175 in Egypt, we would have 1,277,760. At year 200, we would have 2,555,520 sons.
Now if you take into account the women in the population, who were probably more numerous than the men, because the Egyptians were actively trying to kill some of the men and not the women and you take into account those children born between year 200 in Egypt and the Exodus, as well as the fact that some of the grandfathers and grandmothers were still alive you could have 80 percent of the population dying and still remain with 600,000 men over age 20, leaving Egypt (even without relying on the midrash that the average woman in Egypt gave birth to 6 children at one time).
There are also other scenarios that could lead to having a population 5 times the size of the population that actually left Egypt (in existence slightly before the plague of darkness ) but this scenario is sufficient for me to make the point.
I will also add that it probably is really fitting to have at least a 12 son average and not just an 11 son average (at least during the good times in Egypt) because by Yishmael, he was blessed with having  very much children (the Hebrew for very much being מאד מאד) see Breishit Genesis 17:20 where the verse goes on to explain that this means 12 (male) princes.
And in the first chapter of Shmot (Exodus) the increase of Israel is described as very much  מאד, מאד
which at the very least should then equal 12 and probably more, since additional terms of increase are used to describe the population growth of Israel (at least during the good times).

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

I doubt it. Also remember that Yaakov married very late as well. He had 4 wives yes, but the generations downward had to have the females born and they were born from within the Israelites in Egypt and it were they who'm they married. The 1/5th does not have to be Pshat. And if it is, let's say we agree with that statement, then we would also have to accept 1 in 500 or 1 in 5,000 (or whatever other figures are given). The Pshat of the statement (in the Chummas) was that the Israelites came out ARMED out of Egypt. Soo from that word they started Darshining 1 in 5, 1 in 500 etc.
 Now the possibilities are that either 1) non of them are true, 2) on of them are true and the rest are not 3) they meant something else since all the statements could not be true in the literal sense at the same time. It is logically not possible to be 1 in 5 and 1 in 500 at the same time.
 Now the question remains what did they mean in each of these figures? Perhaps the mentality of leaving Egypt (meaning those who came out of the galut mentality or not) Perhaps connected to the actual fact that they came out ARMED as the word implies and yett did not fight back their oppressors at the sea since a slave and someone used to that statues does not fight back even when he is armed. Perhaps.

[edu]

Rashi in his commentary to Breishit Genesis 50:13 says basically that the sons of Yaakov married Canaanite women.
So I disagree with the statement of Tag-MehirTzedek who said:

but the generations downward had to have the females born and they were born from within the Israelites in Egypt and it were they who'm they married.

In theory if you allow for the average Israelite even much more multiple wives than 4 at least in the first century during their exile in Egypt, you can get even to that larger number of 1 in 500. But not every view in the midrash is equal.
Rashi holds that 1 in 500 is not consistent with the Pshat (literal reading) but 1 in 5 surviving Egypt is.

[edu]

Or you don't have to necessarily increase the number of wives but just the amount of children the average wife had.
So for example if for the first 96 years in Egypt, each one of 4 wives has on average 6 sons; and we start with only 60 out of the original 70 having multiple wives.
So then after 24 years in egypt we have 4*6*60 sons=1440 at year 48 we have 1440*4*6=34,560 sons. At year 72 we have 34,560*4*6=829,440 sons. At year 96 we have 829,400 * 4*6=19,906,560 sons.
From this point in time let's just double the number of sons once every 24 years.
39,813,129
79,626,240
159,252,480
318,504,960
If you take this last number and divide by 500=637,009.92
So you see that even though I don't hold by the 1 in 500 viewpoint, in theory it works.

[muman613]

The simple answer...

Because Hashem said so... Hashem told Moshe that Paroah would not let them go and would make it harder on the Children of Israel before he went...

Shemot 3:
18. And they will hearken to your voice, and you shall come, you and the elders of Israel, to the king of Egypt, and you shall say to him, 'The Lord God of the Hebrews has happened upon us, and now, let us go for a three days' journey in the desert and offer up sacrifices to the Lord, our God.'
19. However, I know that the king of Egypt will not permit you to go, except through a mighty hand.
20. And I will stretch forth My hand and smite the Egyptians with all My miracles that I will wreak in their midst, and afterwards he will send you out.

One of Rashis comment on 3:19 "I know that the king of Egypt will not permit..." is:

the king of Egypt will not permit you to go: if I do not show him My mighty hand; i.e., as long as I do not show him My mighty hand, he will not let you go.

So my suggestion (according to Rashis comments) is that Hashem wanted Pharoah to resist and make it harder on the Jewish people in order that they should witness the Plagues and the destruction of the Egyptians.

[muman613]

I suppose this question could stand beside the question over why Hashem, knowing that the Plague of the Death of the Firstborn would be the 'straw which breaks the camels back' so to speak, why didn't he bring it as the first plague and spare the Egyptians from all the suffering? It boils down to the idea that Hashem WANTED to bring the plagues to demonstrate his control over nature and human beings to the world (especially to his Jewish people).

[muman613]

Here is the idea that Egypt was intended to be an 'iron crucible' used to form/refine the Jewish people in Egypt..

http://www.torah.org/learning/legacy/5768/beshalach.html

Pithom! As in “Pithom and Ramses”? How can it be? Earlier, the Torah records that this very city, Pithom, had been built with the backbreaking labor of the enslaved Jewish people. Its soil was soaked with their blood, sweat and tears, its very air full to bursting with the echoes of their groans and cries. If anything, this city was a monument to slavery and oppression. How could the Jewish people view it as “the Gateway to Freedom”?

The commentators explain that the spectacular display of miracles that accompanied the Exodus caused the Jewish people to reevaluate their experiences in Egypt. New thoughts began to germinate in their minds. Surely, the God who was making a mockery of natural law for their sake, the Creator of the heavens and the earth, could not have “forgotten” them. Surely, the God who was now displaying such boundless love for them would not have allowed them to languish for centuries in the misery of Egypt for no purpose. Surely, God’s unseen Presence had been beside them during all their pain and suffering. Unknown to them, He had guided them through the “iron crucible,” as our Sages characterized Egypt, refining them and cleansing them of their baser elements, purifying the core of the people who would stand at Mount Sinai and receive His holy Torah.

Everything they had experienced suddenly had meaning and purpose. In retrospect, the darkest moments of exile were illuminated by their present knowledge. In retrospect, they saw everything as a gateway to freedom. Even the city of Pithom, invested with so much Jewish pain and suffering, became one of the greatest symbols of their ultimate freedom. And thus, they renamed it Pi Hachiros, “the Gateway to Freedom.”

http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/solomon/archives/vaeschanan69.htm

Though Moses reminds the Israelites to avoid idolatry by recalling G-d's revelation to the Israelites at Mount Sinai, he emphasizes that they should remain loyal to His Teachings by recalling the servitude and exodus from slavery in Egypt: 'But G-d has taken you and brought you out of the iron crucible of Egypt…' (4:20)

Those who were in their teens at the times of the Exodus (c.f. Num. 14:29) would have recalled that personally. The Ha-Ktav V'Ha-Kabbala explains that the 'iron crucible' - the slavery in Egypt - was a crucial formative period for the Israelites. Without the rigors of Exile, they would not have been willing to accept the Torah which would discipline their natural and habitual desires.

The 'iron crucible' of Egypt may also be a key to a deeper form of observance. When Moses recalls the revelation at Mount Sinai, he is making an intellectual appeal to the Israelites to remain loyal to Him against the background of paganism in the land they were about to enter. Intellectual appeal does go some way, but it does not create the same personal bond as the feeling of love (c.f. Rashi to 6:5) and gratitude. Recalling the hopelessness of slavery and the series of acts of divine intervention creates the feelings of loyalty and appreciation that come from a positive wish to serve G-d, rather than being forced to serve Him and glumly complying.

[edu]

Muman613 stated:

The simple answer...

Because Hashem said so... Hashem told Moshe that Paroah would not let them go and would make it harder on the Children of Israel before he went...

Shemot 3:
18. And they will hearken to your voice, and you shall come, you and the elders of Israel, to the king of Egypt, and you shall say to him, 'The Lord God of the Hebrews has happened upon us, and now, let us go for a three days' journey in the desert and offer up sacrifices to the Lord, our God.'
19. However, I know that the king of Egypt will not permit you to go, except through a mighty hand.
20. And I will stretch forth My hand and smite the Egyptians with all My miracles that I will wreak in their midst, and afterwards he will send you out.

One of Rashis comment on 3:19 "I know that the king of Egypt will not permit..." is:

the king of Egypt will not permit you to go: if I do not show him My mighty hand; i.e., as long as I do not show him My mighty hand, he will not let you go.

So my suggestion (according to Rashis comments) is that Hashem wanted Pharoah to resist and make it harder on the Jewish people in order that they should witness the Plagues and the destruction of the Egyptians.

Moshe was aware of this prophecy, but nevertheless he complained to G-d about the increase of the persecution of the Israelites after he appeared before the Egyptian king.
It would seem that Moshe initially was under the impression that Pharoah would say no and harden his heart, but would keep the oppression of the nation of Israel at the same level. He was surprised and upset when things had actually gotten worse, being under the impression that it was possible to give the 10 plagues to Egypt without any increase of suffering to the Israelites during his prophetic mission.