I think this Gemara makes it clearer than any other that the snakes Chazal are concerned about are more than the slithering creatures we find in our gardens.

We find in the Gemara (Avodah Zarah 27b, Shabbos 110a) the concept of a supernatural "Rabbinic snake" that punishes people for treating the words of the Rabbis lightly, and whose 'bite' cannot be healed. It is clear from the Gemara in Shabbos that we are not referring to a particularly venomous viper, but to an unavoidable destiny that will occur, if necessary, through supernatural means.

The same may be true of the 'snakes' of our Sugya. As was famously stated by the Vilna Gaon (see introduction to Pe'as ha'Shulchan, 2:32), we cannot possibly fathom the full rationale behind a Rabbinic decree, and that is especially true for the decree against drinking uncovered water (Giluy). The Rabanan may have mentioned snakes, but they meant much more than that. (For example, the Gemara itself mentions the need for cleanliness, although it doesn't attribute the decree to that alone.)

The Gemara proves that watered-down wine is included in the decree and cites episodes related by Amora'im to emphasize that one must avoid (or need not avoid) uncovered watered-down wine. It seems that the Amora'im are backing their words with real-life accounts. Does that mean that they actually saw a physical snake doing what you mentioned in your question? Maybe. But maybe not.

They may have seen a metaphysical demonic incarnation - something only people of their stature saw. Or they may have seen it in a dream (as we find regarding the Agadah in Bava Basra 75), and realized that it was a divine insight. Or they might be using their Rabbinic insight to interpret what ostensibly seemed to be an unremarkable event as a message from Heaven (e.g. - rain falling into a cup and causing to overflow, or ripples in the sea following the boat.)

In short, what matters is the insight that the Rabbis shared with us, in whatever terms they chose to share it; not the actual terms that they used in their description.

Best regards,

Mordecai Kornfeld

Kollel Iyun Hadaf

To add a bit of meaning to what the entire Sugya, in light of what we wrote above -

We are often warned to properly value the life-giving gifts that Hash-m gave us. And the more life-giving the gift is, the more respect it must be given. "The righteous are more careful to protect their possessions than their own bodies!" (Chulin 91a). To that effect, we find (Chulin 105b) that when a person treats bread-crumbs with disrespect, he may be punished with poverty.

Perhaps we can find a trace of that idea in the Isur of Giluy. Giluy only applies to the three drinkable liquids: wine, water and milk (Terumos 8:4). These are the life-sustaining ingredients for mankind.

The Gemara says that aside from the prohibition of Giluy, it is appropriate to avoid leaving liquids uncovered due to cleanliness (Menakrusa, Avodah Zarah 30a; the Gemara in Chulin ibid. makes a similar mention of cleanliness regarding breadcrumbs). We may suggest that leaving these liquids open to become contaminated shows disregard and disrespect for Hash-m's gifts; that is what makes a person susceptible to cardinal punishment.

(Wine that is mixed with water is not as exclusive as pure wine, or pure water, which is why it is not as dangerous to leave it uncovered. But if it is pure, it must be treated appropriately - hence the discussion of snakes filling it with water etc.)

Please remember - who are we to make suggestions as to what Chazal had in mind? I write this only to bring these Gemaras closer to everyday experience and make them more palatable for those who only feel comfortable when presented with more familiar concepts. The true meaning of these Gemaras and the decree against Giluy is well beyond the scope of this forum, and of our comprehension.

May Hash-m reveal to us more and more of the beauty of His Torah!

Best regards,

Mordecai Kornfeld

Kollel Iyun Hadaf