[Avodah] Geirut

[Chana Luntz]

RAF writes:

> 1: the apotropos can still not swear regarding issues that 
> came about before he became apotropos. Being 10 years in service does
not 
> enable you to know first hand what happened before the onset of
service.

Agreed.  The question is, is there *any* case in which an apitropos is
allowed to swear - assuming it is about something he knows about *on
behalf of the katan* ie where it is the katan's property and the
fundamental obligation to swear is that of the katan.  My understanding
is that - even if you find a case in which the apitropos has full
knowledge, (and if he had served for 10 years then it is quite likely
there exists property about which he has full knowledge and where there
are no links to anything that happened before the onset of service -
because it was acquired by the katan, by him, during that period) - he
still could not swear, on behalf of the katan, ie in the place of the
owner of the object. Even if the lack is nothing to do with knowledge,
as the apitropos' knowledge is at least as great as any normal baal.
How about a shor that was acquired by the katan (ie for him by the
apitropos) during his period of service (or was born to the katan during
the period of the apitropos's service)- can the apitropos swear any
necessary oaths about it on behalf of the katan (in circumstances when
the katan if a gadol would otherwise be required as the baal hashor to
swear or it would be a benefit to the katan for him to swear)?  Can the
apitropos substitute his daas for that of the katan?  (Even here of
course, if he could, it is possible that we are deeming the property
transferred to the apitropos so that he can swear as baal - but less
clearly, as the obligation to swear presumably occurred before this
transfer could be deemed to take place).

> KT, GS,
> -- 
> Arie Folger
> http://www.ariefolger.googlepages.com


Shabbat Shalom

Chana