Why does the Torah write "Ken Yirbeh v'Chen Yifrotz" in the future; and not 'Ken Rabah v'Chen Paratz'?
Rashi: The purpose of the affliction was to reduce their numbers. 1 Hashem however, arranged for the opposite to happen. Consequently, when Pharaoh said 'Pen Yirbeh... ,' Hashem retorted 'Ken Yirbeh...!' 2
Oznayim la'Torah (to 1:20): By the same token, following Pharaoh's decree to kill the Jewish babies, the Torah writes "va'Yirev ha'Am va'Ya'atzmu Me'od" (1:20). And following the decree to cast the Jewish babies into the Nile, Amram remarried Yocheved and Moshe was born (Shemos 2).
Why did the Bnei Yisrael's miraculous increase in numbers come in proportion to their suffering?
Maharal (Gevuros Hashem Ch. 15, p. 72): Bnei Yisrael are attached to Kedushah. As their physical aspect (Chomer) becomes weakened, their Nefesh and Ru'ach attach to holy power. 1
Why does the Torah insert this Pasuk before "va'Ya'avidu Mitzrayim..." - and not afterwards?
Oznayim la'Torah: Bearing in mind the fact that the whole purpose of afflicting Yisrael was to reduce their numbers, once they saw that they had the opposite effect, they ought logically to have made life easier for them. The Pasuk therefore relates that, in spite of the incredible increase in numbers that the afflictions caused, the Egyptians, in their hatred of Yisrael, made life even more difficult for them, allowing every Egyptian to force any Yisrael that he saw to perform any form of back-breaking task, whether in building or work in the field.
What does "va'Yakutzu Mi'penei Bnei Yisrael" mean?
Rashi #1, Ramban, Rashbam, Targum Onkelos and Targum Yonasan: 'The Egyptians became sick (Katzu) of living before Yisrael.' 1
Rashi #2: Yisrael were like thorns (Kotzim) in their eyes. 2
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes: "'V'Cha'asher Ye'anu Oso' - [I.e.,] as much as they would devote their attention to afflicting them...." What is Rashi explaining?
Gur Aryeh: The word "Ye'anu" is in future tense; while we would expect the narrative to be in past tense ('Inu'). Rashi interprets this to mean, 'As much as the Egyptians would plan and plot how to afflict them (i.e. in the future)' ... that is how much they would reproduce.
Rashi writes: "... that is how much Hashem would devote His attention to make them increase and spread." What is Rashi explaining?
Gur Aryeh: If we explained the word "Ye'anu" (future tense) as referring to the Egyptians' plans (see 1:12:1.01:1), we should interpret the verbs "Yirbeh... Yifrotz" the same way! (Since it cannot mean that the Bnei Yisrael planned and plotted to increase their numbers in response; rather,) Hashem Himself devoted His attention (so to speak) that they should increase.
Rashi writes: "'Ken Yirbeh' - [I.e.] so they increased, and so they spread." Here, Rashi simply changes the verbs into past tense. Doesn't this conflict with the previous Rashi (where he interprets the future tense to mean, 'Hashem planned that they would increase' - see 1:12:1.02:1)?
Gur Aryeh: The verbs "Yirbeh" and "Yifrotz" are in simple form (i.e. they relate to Bnei Yisrael themselves). 1 Therefore, we explain in simple past tense, "That is how much [the Bnei Yisrael] increased and spread." Rashi added above, that this was due to Hashem's plans on their behalf. It is written in this manner to hint to the Midrash that Rashi cites; that Hashem was speaking - "You [Egyptians] say 'Pen Yirbeh,' but I say 'Ken Yirbeh!'" (based on Sotah 11a).
Whereas according to Rashi's interpretation above, that this was Hashem's plan, the verse should say 'Ken Yarbeh' and 'Ken Yafritz' (in the causative tense, Hif'il). (EK)
Rashi writes: "... Chazal interpret, 'they were like thorns (Kotzim) in their eyes.'" Why was this so?
Maharal (Gevuros Hashem Ch. 15, p. 72): The Egyptians were diametric opposites to Bnei Yisrael. 1 As Bnei Yisrael emerged as a nation, the Mitzrim felt stung by the clash.
Maharal (Gevuros Hashem, beg. Ch. 4): The Egyptians were basely materialistic (Chomer), steeped in sexual immorality. The Bnei Yisrael had attained stature and purpose (Tzurah), and were holy and chaste. Also refer to Bereishis 15:13:3.3:1 and the note there.
