הרחמן הוא יקים לנו את סכת דוד הנופלת
“May the Merciful one rebuild the fallen succah of Dovid”
On Succos we add a request to Birchas Hamazon in which we ask Hashem to rebuild the fallen succah of Dovid. This expression is based on a pasuk in the Haftorah for Parshas Acharei Mos which states (Amos 9:11): ביום ההוא אקים את סכת דוד הנפלת – “On that day I will raise up the fallen succah of Dovid”, which the Mahari Kara writes is a reference to the Beis HaMikdosh. In his sefer Netzach Yisroel (35), the Maharal points out that the word “succah” connotes a temporary hut and is therefore an unusual term to use to describe the Beis HaMikdosh, which was a sturdy building that stood for centuries. Wouldn’t it be more accurate to call it a house?
The Maharal explains that if a house is destroyed and subsequently rebuilt, any new structure constructed there – even in the same location – will be considered a new house, not an extension of the previous one. In contrast, a succah is intended to be a temporary dwelling, so each time it is taken apart and reassembled, the rebuilt succah is viewed as a continuation of what stood there previously. With this distinction, he beautifully suggests that Amos specifically refers to the Beis HaMikdosh as a succah to express that although it has been destroyed twice, each time the Beis HaMikdosh is rebuilt it is an extension of those that preceded it. By extension, the succahs that we erect each Tishrei are also continuations of our succahs of years past.
With this insight, Rav Yisroel Reisman explains that we can now understand the Mishnah’s teaching (Shabbos 12:3) that the walls in the Mishkan were labeled so that they would always be used in the same location each time it was reassembled. If the walls were identical, why weren’t they interchangeable? Since the Mishkan was a succah, each time it was reassembled was not the creation of a new structure, but the restoration of the previous iteration, and therefore care had to be taken to ensure that the walls remained in their designated locations.
Rav Reisman adds that the Gemara (Succah 6b) derives the requirement for a succah to have at least three walls from the fact that the word “succah” appears three times in the Torah. On two occasions it is written חסר (missing the letter ו) – סכה – while once it is written מלא (complete) – סוכה. In light of Amos’s comparison of the Beis HaMikdosh to a succah, we now understand that the first two Botei Mikdosh were missing in the sense that they were not lasting, while the third Beis HaMikdosh will be complete and permanent, may it be speedily in our days. (R’ Ozer Alport)
