Talmud for Bava Batra 8:2

Rav⁴⁴This is the correct text from the parallel in Baba batra 8:6 (from a different editorial team). Rav Jeremiah was a contemporary of Rav, Rebbi Jeremiah lived about 100 years later. Jeremiah in the name of Rav: Practice follows Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel⁴⁵This also is Rav’s position in the Babli, 83b, but with a reasoning diametrically opposed to that of the Yerushalmi., but not in the matter of words⁴⁶Rosh has a slightly different text:
רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְשֵׁם רַב. הֲלָכָה כְּרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל. שֶׁאִם מֵתָה יְרוֹשְׁתָהּ אֲבָל לֹא לְעִנְייָן דְּבָרָיו שֶׁאָמַר מִפֻּנֵי שֶׁהִתְנָה עַל מַה שֶׁכָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה. וְכָל־הַמַּתְנֶה עַל מַה שֶׁכָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה תְּנָאוֹ בָטֵל. בִּתְנָאֵי גּוּף. וְהָכָא בִּתְנָאֵי מָמוֹן אָנוּ קַייָמִין. וְלָמָּה אָֽמְרוּ תְּנָאוֹ בָטֵל. שֶׁבְּסוֹף הוּא זָכָה בָהֶן.
Rav Jeremiah in the name of Rav: Practice follows Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel, that if she dies he inherits from her, but not because of his words, "since he made a condition contradicting what is written in the Torah, and anybody's condition contradicting what is written in the Torah is invalid," in personal matters. But here we deal with money matters! Why did they say that the condition is invalid? Because in the end he acquired it.. Practice follows Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel for he said, if she dies he inherits from her, but in matters of words, “since he made a condition contradicting what is written in the Torah, and anybody’s condition contradicting what is written in the Torah is invalid,” in personal matters. But in money matters, one’s stipulations are valid⁴⁷A generally agreed principle in the Yerushalmi, cf. Qiddušin 1:2 (59c 1.43), Baba meṣi‘a 7:10 (11c 1.11); in the Babli accepted with reservations in the name of R. Jehudah, 57a. and that is a money matter! Why did we say that the condition is invalid? Because in the end he acquired it⁴⁸In Baba batra 8:6, the reason is given the practice follows R. Joḥanan ben Baroqa who holds that wills can be written only in favor of people who could be heirs (if a number of closer relatives had died.) Then the law of inheritance is compulsory and falls under the category of personal matters.. Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: The law should have been that if she⁴⁹The definitively married wife should retain the right of disposal of her paraphernalia property since she retains sole ownership. sold or gave it away it should be valid, for [the buyer] acquired it. Why did they say it is invalid? That a wife should not sell her husband’s property and say, it is mine⁵⁰She could claim that mortmain property was really hers to dispose of..