- Why there is no concern that a non-Jew today is from the Aseres HaShevatim re: kiddushin
On the bottom of Daf 16b, Rav Yehudah said in the name of Rav Assi: If an idolater is mekadesh a Jewish woman nowadays, we suspect that it is a valid kiddushin because he might be a Jew from the Ten Tribes. Rashi explains that Rav Assi holds that a child born from a Jewish man and a gentile woman is a Jewish mamzer, and therefore, nowadays we suspect that every non-Jewish man is a Jewish mamzer descendant from the Ten Tribes, and we need to suspect that the kiddushin is valid. The Gemara clarifies that this is only in a place where the Ten Tribes are settled. When Shmuel heard this teaching, he disagreed and said that a son that comes from a non-Jewish woman is called her son and is not considered Jewish. Therefore, if a man from the Ten Tribes married a gentile woman, the child is not Jewish at all. When the Gemara states that there is still a concern, since the children born from the women from the Ten Tribes are still Jewish, it answers that there is a tradition that the women from the Ten Tribes were barren. Rashi explains that their wombs were torn and could not conceive. The Meiri says that this was due to their difficult journey into exile. Alternatively, there are those that say that Shmuel said: לא זזו משם עד שעשאום עובדי כובבים גמורים – The neviim did not move from there until they declared those from the Ten Tribes who married non-Jews, complete idolaters.
- Sources for אשת אחיו שלא היה בעולמו and that yibum only applies to paternal brothers
The opening Mishnah of the second perek discusses the case of אשת אחיו שלא היה בעולמו – the wife of one’s non-contemporary brother, and the Gemara asks for the source that she is not taken in yibum. Rav Yehudah said in the name of Rav: The passuk states in the parshah of yibum , "כי ישבו אחים יחדו" – When brothers dwell together and one of them dies childless. שהיתה להם ישיבה אחת בעולם פרט לאשת אחיו שלא היה בעולמו – This implies that the brothers dwelled at the same time in the world, excluding the wife of one’s non-contemporary brother. Rav Yehudah then expounds that the word "יחדו" – together, teaches, מיוחדים בנחלה – joined in regard to inheritance, which Rashi explains means, that they inherit each other, פרט לאחיו מן האם – excluding from yibum, one’s brother from a mother, with whom they do not inherit each other. Rabbah said that the source that yibum is only for paternal brothers is learned from a gezeirah shavah ofמבני יעקב "אחוה" "אחוה" – brotherhood, brotherhood, from the passuk about Yaakov’s sons. Just as Yaakov’s sons were all paternal brothers but not all of them were maternal brothers, so too yibum only applies to paternal brothers.
- Rav Huna said שומרת יבם שמתה מותר באמה because he holds אין זיקה
Rav Huna said in the name of Rav: שומרת יבם שמתה מותר באמה – If a woman who was awaiting her yavam, died before he did yibum or chalitzah, he is permitted to marry her mother. The Gemara says that we see that Rav Huna holds אין זיקה – there is no zikah-bond between the yavam and his yevamah. Rashi explains that we do not look at the zikah to the yevamah as a bond that makes her like an arusah, an engaged woman, who would forbid her mother to him after her death. The Gemara asks that Rav Huna should have just said that the halachah is like the Tanna who holds אין זיקה, and answers that one might have thought that there is no zikah when there are two or more brothers, since it is not clear which brother the yevamah is for, but if there is one brother then one might have thought יש זיקה. The Gemara then asks that he should have stated that he holds like the Tanna who says that there is no zikah even when there is only one brother, and it answers that one might have thought that then the yavam would be mutar to the mother even while the yevamah was alive. The Gemara then brings the opinion of Rav Yehudah, who holds יש זיקה, and forbids the yavam to his mother-in-law.
