Reference for Bava Metzia 216:10
הני זוזי טבי והני זוזי תקולי לית ביה משום דינא דבר מצרא הני ציירי והני שרי לית ביה משום דינא דבר מצרא
Of urban neighbours and rural neighbours, the former have priority;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If A is selling a field, and B is his neighbour in town, having a house next to his, whilst C is a neighbour of a field belonging to A, but not of that which is for sale, so that neither is a neighbour of the field to be sold, priority must be given to B, the urban neighbour. Thus, this does not refer to pre-emption at all. So Rashi, who bases his interpretation on the following arguments: (i) Whereas the whole of the preceding passage uses the phrase 'the law of neighbourly pre-emption' ([H]), this passage speaks of priority, in quite a different phrase ([H]); (ii) Had the reference been to pre-emption, the previous passage should have included it, reading, (A sale) to a woman, orphans, a partner, and urban neighbour, and a scholar (as this passage continues) is not subject to pre-emption; (iii) Surely a scholar cannot infringe upon the pre-emption rights of an ignoramus! Tosaf. holds that the passage does refer to pre-emption, but treats of two neighbours. The weight of authority supports Rashi's view; v. H.M. 175, 50. ');"><sup>10</sup></span>