Ketubot

the latter may nevertheless pay for him his shekel,  repay his debt  and restore to him any object he may have lost; but where a reward is taken,  the benefit is to be given  to the sacred funds.  Now, one can well be satisfied [with the ruling that] he may 'pay for him his shekel' [because by this payment] he merely performs a religious act,  for it was taught:  It is lawful to withdraw  [from the funds of the Temple treasury] on the account of that which was lost,  collected  or about to be collected;  and [the ruling that he may] restore to him any object he may have lost' [is also intelligible since thereby] also he is performing a religious duty;  but [how could he be permitted to] 'repay his debt' [when thereby] he undoubtedly benefits  him? — R. Oshaia replied: 'This ruling  is that of  Hanan who said: HE LOSES HIS MONEY.  Raba, however, replied: The ruling  may be said [to agree even with the view of] the Rabbis,  for here  we are dealing [with the case of a man] who borrowed money on the condition that he does not repay it [except when he is inclined to do so].  It is well that Raba does not give the same reply as R. Oshaia, since [he wishes] the ruling to agree even with the opinion of the Rabbis. On what ground, however, does not R. Oshaia [wish to] give the same reply as Raba? — R. Oshaia can answer you: Granted that he  has no actual benefit;