Think of it as Popcorn...

Don't think of this analogy as flippant; it isn't meant to be. Ever notice how compact the kernels of popping corn are, and then when you heat them with a little oil, they explode and increase greatly in bulk? And they become edible when that happens, as opposed to the impossible-to-eat status of unpopped corn.

The Aseret HaDibrot (Ten Commandments) as presented in Parshat Yitro were like kernels of popping corn. Very compact, and perhaps because of that, they are difficult to understand, as is. In Parshat Mishpatim (and many other places in the Torah, but very noticeably in Mishpatim, and Kedoshim as well) the corn is popped, the mitzvot explode, increase in bulk, and they become easier to understand and consequently easier to relate to and put into action.

LO TIGNOV, Thou shalt not steal. Two words, a quarter of a pasuk. In one respect, it is the prohibition of kidnapping. But another way of looking at it is as a "chapter heading", the name of a category. In Mishpatim, among its 53 mitzvot, are close to 20 mitzvot that in some way relate to theft. There are many other mitzvot in different sedras. In Mishpatim we find the fine tuning of the prohibition against theft. Take, as an example, the mitzvot to follow the laws of the various types of damages. There are situations where not to pay would be a form of stealing from the "victim". And yet, to pay full damages might be a form of stealing from the owner of the animal that caused the damage. Fine tuning. You cannot do that with just the words LO TIGNOV. you need to pop the corn. 

The mitzvot concerning lending to the poor, not charging interest, not being overly demanding of one who cannot pay his debts. These mitzvot involve the subtle side of stealing. Later in the Torah we find the prohibitions of stealing and robbing. The "obvious" forms of theft. Also in Mishpatim are the laws of guardians - the unpaid and the paid, the leaser and the borrower. The Torah does not lump them all together, but details (and more so in the Talmud) the differences. We might say that to hold an unpaid guardian responsible for the theft of what he is watching would be stealing from him. To let a borrower of the hook for the theft of what he borrowed would be stealing from the lender.

Similarly, we find in Mishpatim (and elsewhere) the expanded versions of the other mitzvot of Aseret HaDibrot. We can view Shmita and the Chagim as the popped form of the Shabbat kernel.

The description of Matan Torah began in Yitro but continues in Mishpatim. In a way, that says that Yitro is not the only sedra which contains the story of Matan Torah - Mishpatim has just as much claim. Maybe more, because it is in Mishpatim that we said NAASEH V'NISHMA. (In Yitro, all we said was NAASEH.)

And this means that the content of Mishpatim and the mitzvot contained therein are to be associated with revelation at Sinai just as much as the mitzvot in Yitro.

Something to think about. Popcorn.