I looked up the gemara here that Rashi quotes and do not see what it has to do with the passuk ... the manna is going from solid to liquid and the donkey is turning back to her prior form as a sorceress.
Please explain why not use Tehillim 97:5??
Why does Rashi quote - same root but not same transformation.
Chaim
Shalom Chaim,
The common denominator between the two sources is not necessarily change of state (i.e., solid to liquid), in which case you would be correct to say that the comparison is mistaken, but rather loss of form (i.e., from a donkey to a board). Quite honestly, I have no personal experience with sorcery, but I can imagine that if I was standing there watching as the water reached the donkey it would appear as if the donkey was melting away only to end up as a board.
So, we are not addressing the actual state of the donkey ("the donkey is turning back to her prior form") as much as the perceived action in the eyes of the spectator.
In addition, Rashi is expanding on the Targum. The Targum defines "Nameis" as "Pashar" in Aramaic, so Rashi quotes the Gemora to show how that word is used in a comparable context.
Rashi does not refer to Tehilim 97:5 because there the Targum is "Yitmisun" and not "Pashar."
Shimon Brodie