Nazir 54b - Mummies and Eretz Ha'amim

The Mishna L'melech (Avel 3:1) has a Teshuva where he discusses kohanim going into the mummy business. He begins by saying that although they may consist of very dry bones they are still metamei. However, his main tzad l'hakel is based on the opinion of the Yerai'im that we follow R' shimon bar yochai, that aside from goyim not being metmei b'ohel, they are also not metamei b'magah (Tosafos 54a clearly rejects this and says that even according to R' shimon they are metamei b'maga). Based on the combination of the Yerai'im, and the Ra'avad who says that any kohein who is already tamei (even after he separates from the meis) has not issur to become tamei again, the mishna l'melech creates a s'fek sfeika to be meikil, but eventually rejects it since it is clear from the many places including our Tosafos in the name of R' Chaim Cohen that a kohein cannot make himself tamei even if he is already tamei meis.

The issue that is related to our gemara is that the gemara in Avoda Zara 13a says that a kohein cannot enter into chutz la'aretz except for a mitzvah because of tu'mas eretz ha'amim. The Rambam in Hilchos Ohalos (2:3) seems to understand that the concern of eretz ha'amim is because of the fetuses of goyim that are buried there. This would clearly indicate that there is at least an issur of tu'mas magah and masah for kohanim to touch non-jewish corpses. However, the Mishna L'melech pushes off this proof based on Tosafos on our daf who says that the gezeira of eretz ha'amim is due to "the many jews that were killed in chutz l'aretz", not goyim.

BTW - Practically speaking, what happened ot the issur for a kohein to go from eretz yisroel to chutz l'aretz (other than for mitzvah purposes)? The Shulchan Aruch 369 rules that a kohein cannot go into eretz ha'amim, but the shach (3) writes that it only applies when eretz yisroel is muchzak b'tahara, but nowadays does not apply. This opinion is also quoted in the b'er hagola from the maharshal. The Shevus Yakov (brought in pischei teshuva) argues and claims that it applies even nowadays. R' Akiva Eiger justifies the minhag to be lenient about this either because parnasah is signifciant enough of a mitzvah (but this would not justify those who travel to chutz la'aretz for vacation) or because we are all tamei meisim. The second rationale seems to be either based on shitas ha'ravad that the issur of tu'mas meis in general only applies when the kohein is tahor, and although we are not meikil for tu'mah d'oraysa, we rely on the ra'avad for tu'mas ha'amim which is only d'robonon. But more likely he means to say that the entire gezeira of eretz ha'amim is in order to maintain the tahara of the kohein, and would not apply when the kohein is tamei meis.