ט רבא בר שרשום נפק עליה קלא דקא אכיל ארעא דיתמי א"ל אביי אימא לי איזי גופא דעובדא היכי הוה אמר ליה ארעא במשכונתא הוה נקיטנא מאבוהון דיתמי והוה לי
9 Did you not yourself say that the accepted ruling is that of Rabbah in the case of the land and of R. Joseph in the case of the money, namely, that the money should remain In Its present ownership?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The bond after it has been honoured is regarded by Abaye as on the same footing as the 'forged' bond mentioned above. ');"><sup>9</sup></span> This, however, holds good only if the surety said to the other, 'After repaying, you again borrowed the money from me.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because the previous transaction was now closed, and the bond no longer had any force. ');"><sup>10</sup></span> If, however, he says, 'I returned it to you because the coins were worn or rusty,' the obligation of the bond still remains. It was rumoured of Raba b. Sharshom that he was using for himself land that belonged to orphans [for whom he was trustee]. So Abaye sent for him and said to him: Tell me now the main facts of the case. He said: I took over this land from the father of the orphans as a mortgage [for money that he owed me], and he owed me