Reb Chaim, this is an interesting question as always!

1) Rashi writes (bottom line of right column on 110b) that the 10 tribes will not be received by the Mashiach together with the returning exiles. The reason is because they spoke badly about Eretz Yisrael. Rashi cites the Gemara earlier (94a_ that when the 10 tribes reached places in Chutz la'Aretz they said they are just as nice, or more so, than Eretz Yisrael.

2) This is consistent with the Gemara on 90a. The Mishnah there states that someone who says that the Revival of the Dead is not stated in the Torah will have no share in the World to Come. The Gemara tells us that the reason for this is Midah k'Neged Midah; since he denied the Revival of the Dead, he will have no share in the latter. Similarly, we can say that someone who speaks badly about Eretz Yisrael will not be received by the Mashiach back into Eretz Yisrael.

3) According to this we can understand why Rashi writes that it is only the generation of the 10 tribes which will not return, but their descendants will return. This is because it was only that generation itself who spoke badly about Eretz Yisrael.

4) The above thinking can also apply to the generation of the desert. They spoke Lashon ha'Ra about Eretz Yisrael, so they cannot return to Eretz Yisrael.

5) I found, bs'd, support for what I wrote above in the Chidushei ha'Ran in our sugya. He writes: "It is only the generation that went into exile who will not return, because they abandoned Hash-m and spoke badly about Eretz Yisrael.... However, their descendants, whether a few or many, will return in the times of the Mashiach and will serve Hash-m. These are the 'scattered of Yisrael' whom Hash-m will gather. We possess a tradition (Bava Basra 115b) that no tribe will totally die out."

6) The Maharit, cited in the Mesivta edition of the Gemara here in Yalkut Bi'urim, explains at length what was so bad about the generation of the 10 tribes, and this will help us understand why Rebbi Akiva changed from his usual Chesed self in connection with the 10 tribes. The Maharit cites Bereshis Rabah (28:5) which states that the generation of the 10 tribes was worse than the generation of the Flood. Bereshis 6:5 tells us that prior to the Flood, the people had a bad Yetzer ha'Ra all day long. The 10 tribes were worse because even at night they were thinking up bad things to do, and in the daytime they put their schemes into practice (see Michah 2:1).

7) The Midrash asks that, if so, why did no one survive from the wicked of the Flood generation, while some of the 10 tribes did survive? The answer is that they survived because of the merit of the Tzadikim and Tzadikos who will rise up from the offspring of the 10 tribes.

Kol Tuv,

Dovid Bloom

I have dealt above mostly with why Rebbi Akiva maintained that the 10 tribes will not return, and now I will try, bs'd, to explain why he learned that the generation of the desert will not gain Olam ha'Ba.

1. First, it is important to note what the Me'iri here writes about the opinion of Rebbi Eliezer. He writes that it seems from the words of Rebbi Eliezer that the generation of the desert and the congregation of Korach felt that they had sinned and they did Teshuvah.

2. It seems that the Me'iri learned this from the fact that Rebbi Eliezer applied the verse (Tehilim 50:5), "Gather for me my Chasidim," to the desert generation. The fact that Rebbi Eliezer called them "Chasidim" must mean that they did Teshuvah. The question now is, why did Rebbi Akiva not agree with Rebbi Eliezer?

I suggest that the answer lies in the words of Rebbi Yehoshua ben Karchah here in the Gemara. I wish to make a small observation which may add a little spice to the discussion. This is the opinion of Rashi in Bechoros (58a, DH Chutz), who says that whenever Shas mentions Rebbi Yehoshua ben Karchah, it refers to Rebbi Yehoshua the son of Rebbi Akiva. Since Rebbi Akiva was bald, "Kere'ach," his son was called "the son of Karchah." This may add a little more understanding to Rebbi Yehoshua ben Karchah's statement that "Gather for me my Chasidim" refers to Rebbi Akiva and his colleagues who were prepared to be slaughtered for the sake of the Torah. This is the appreciation of a son for the Mesirus Nefesh of his father.

3. At any rate, we do see that Rebbi Yehoshua ben Karchah maintained that it was Rebbi Akiva and his colleagues who were called Chasidim, and not the desert generation. We can gain some insight about how Rebbi Akiva achieved this level from the Gemara in Menachos 29b, which relates that Moshe Rabeinu was shown a prophetic image of Rebbi Akiva making Derashos from every crown of the letters of the Torah. It seems that Rebbi Akiva was on a similar level in Torah as Moshe Rabeinu. We also learn in the Midrash (Bamidbar Rabah 19:6) that "matters which were not revealed to Moshe were revealed to Rebbi Akiva and his colleagues."

4. Since we have learned that Rebbi Akiva was on a similar Madreiga to Moshe Rabeinu, we now may understand why Rebbi Yehoshua ben Karchah maintained that the verse, "Gather for me my Chasidim," must apply to Rebbi Akiva and cannot apply to the sinners of the generation of Moshe, even if they later did Teshuvah. While Rebbi Akiva was renowned for his attribute of Chesed, he also was realistic about his Madreiga in relation to others and he knew that he was greater than the sinners of the desert. The term "Chasidim" is more appropriate to his group than to the desert generation. Since Rebbi Akiva disagrees with Rebbi Eliezer and maintains that the verse, "Gather for me my Chasidim," does not apply to the desert generation, it follows that there is no reason to say that the latter will reach Olam ha'Ba.

Dovid Bloom