I saw the minchas chhinuch (I think it was mitzvah 90 on issur lo ishuvoo) says its assur to sell land to a Nochri only in the part of eretz yisrael of olei bavel not not oleh mitzraim. Why should this be? Ussually the difference between oleh bavel and mitzraim is for mitzvas shitolei baaretz? Shouldnt it be assur in all Israel?
Also while we are on the topic what would be the halachah by mitzvas of eretz yisrael that are not tolei be'aretz but are only noheg in Israel (like pidyun peter chamur, or reisheis hageiz etc)? Would they only apply is oleh bavel or also oleh mitzraim
Yaakov Goldberg, Jerusalem
1) The Minchas Chinuch (Mitzvah 94:4) writes that the Isur to sell land to a Nochri applies only in Eretz Yisrael which posseses Kedushah. He writes that he has explained on a few occasions that places that were not held by Olei Bavel do not possess Kedushah.
2) It is possible that the prohibition against selling to them land is because by doing so one thereby removes this land from the Mitzvos. One can argue that the Isur of Lo Techanem goes hand in hand with the Mitzvah of living in Eretz Yisrael, which in itself is a Mitzvah in order that one can fulfil the Mitzvos of Eretz Yisrael. I can offer support for this argument from Sotah (14a) where we learn that Moshe Rabeinu wanted to enter Eretz Yisrael because there are many Mitzvos which one can do only in Eretz Yisrael, so he wanted to come to Eretz Yisrael so that he could do all the Mitzvos. It may be, according to this, that one cannot fulfil the Mitzvah of living in Eretz Yisrael in parts where one cannot do the special Mitzvos. This is why the Rashbam (Bava Basra 91a, DH Ein Yotz'in) writes that the reason why one may not leave Eretz Yisrael is that by doing so one removes himself from the Mitzvos.
3) Yes, according to the Shulchan Aruch (YD 333:1), who says that Reishis ha'Geiz applies only in Eretz Yisrael, it seems that according to the Minchas Chinuch it would not apply in places not conquered by Olei Bavel since they have no Kedushah. However, I do not know what you mean by Pidyon Peter Chamur, since the Rambam (Hilchos Bikurim 1:7) writes that this also apllies in Chutz la'Aretz.
4) I should stress that what I have written applies only according to the Minchas Chinuch. There are several other opinions on this matter, so what I have written cannot be relied upon for practical Halachah.
5) I want to try, bs'd, to elaborate a little more on some of the ideas that I mentioned above.
First, it should be pointed out that the Chazon Ish (Shevi'is 24:1, end of DH u'Mevu'ar) writes that he disagrees with the Minchas Chinuch. My aim at the moment is to try to explain the position of the Minchas Chinuch but it may highlight the Chidush of the Minchas Chinuch if we look briefly at the opinion which differs from his. The Chazon Ish writes that the Isur to let the Nochri settle in Eretz Yisrael is not dependent on the Kedushah of Eretz Yisrael, but rather this Din is because Hash-m wants Eretz Yisrael to be settled by Yisrael and not be given over to Nochrim.
6) This is clearly different from the Minchas Chinuch, who writes that it is only Eretz Yisrael which is Mekudeshes which one may not sell to Nochrim. There seems to be support for the Minchas Chinuch from the Sugya here on 21a, which states that one of the reasons for why one may not sell the field is that one thereby removes it from the Mitzvah of Ma'aser, which suggests that the issues of Kedushah and Mitzvos are important.
7) There are sources that say there is no Kedushah in areas of Eretz Yisrael which were conquered only by the Olei Mitzrayim. See Rashi to Yevamos 16a (DH Amon), who writes that Moshe Rabeinu conquered Amon and Moav from Sichon and they received the Kedushah of Eretz Yisrael. Rashi adds that in the time of the second Beis ha'Mikdash the Kedushah fell away and they sowed the fields there in the Shemitah year.
8) See also the first Mishnah in the sixth chapter of Maseches Shevi'is which states that one may not eat the Shevi'is fruit of areas held by the Olei Bavel but one may eat the fruit of areas held only by the Olei Mitzrayim. The Rash writes that this means that one may not eat the fruit of the Olei Bavel areas if Bi'ur was not performed. We can infer from this that one may eat the fruit of the Olei Mitzrayim areas even without Bi'ur. Other Mefarshim also write that, according to this, there are other Mitzvos of Shevi'is which do not apply in Olei Mitzrayim areas (see the Vilna Ga'on in Shenos Eliyahu on the Mishnayos, beginning of the sixth Perek. See also Teshuvos Minchas Shlomo 3:158:4; Mishnas Ya'avetz, Shevi'is Shemitah v'Yovel, chapter 4, page 60; Derech Emunah, Shemitah v'Yovel 4:195, and Tziyun Halachah #335).
9) We see from the above that according to some Mefarshim, Olei Mitzrayim areas lack Kedushah and Mitzvos, so this may be why the Minchas Chinuch writes that one is allowed to sell them.
Gmar Chasimah Tovah,
Dovid Bloom