Comparing the first and second set of Luchot mentioned in the Parashat HaShavua.
In R. Amnon Bazak’s sixth essay for Parashat Ki Tisa, “Bein HaLuchot HaRishonim LaShniyim” (Nekudat Peticha: Iyunim Ketzarim BePeshuta Shel Parashat HaShavua, Yediot Achronot, Sifrei Chemed, Yeshivat Har Etzion, Rishon LeTziyon, 2018 [new, expanded edition], pp. 200-1), he speculates concerning the essential difference between the first and second tablets upon which the Ten Commandments were written.
Regarding the first set, which Moshe destroyed upon being confronted with the people sinning before the Golden Calf (see Shemot 32:19), the Tora categorically states that they had been both Hewed, as well as Written by HaShem:
Ibid. 32:16
And the tablets were the Work of God, and the writing was the Writing of God, graven upon the tablets.
By contrast, re the second tablets, the Tora states that God first Intended, and then Did what He Said he would Do, only to Write upon them:
Ibid. 34:1
And the LORD Said unto Moshe: Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first; and I will Write upon the tablets the Words that were on the first tablets, which thou didst break.
Ibid. 4
And he (Moshe) hewed two tablets of stone like unto the first; and Moshe rose up early in the morning, and went up unto mount Sinai, as the LORD had Commanded him, and took in his hand two tablets of stone.
Ibid. 28
And he (Moshe) was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And He (God) Wrote upon the tablets the Words of the Covenant, the Ten Things.
RaShBaM s.v. VaYichtov
The Holy One, on the tablets. This is because it had been stated above: (Ibid. 34:1) “…I will Write upon the tablets the Words that were on the first tablets…” and it is then written: (Ibid. 28) “…And He Wrote upon the tablets…” like the writing on the first set.
(From a syntactical perspective, the same subject in the first part of v. 28 should serve as the antecedent of the pronoun in the second portion of the verse, in this case, since Moshe is the original subject, it would be logical that he continues to be the subject throughout the verse, and therefore he is the one who wrote the second tablets. However, it is logical that HaShem would be the Writer, with a different subject being referenced in the second part of v. 28, since it is assumed that this verse is bearing out what God had Stated was His Intention in v. 1.)
R. Bazak notes that a similar dichotomy is reflected in the summary verses of the incident in the final book of the Tora:
You must be logged in to post a comment.