Shalom Aleichem. Here in Shulchan Menachem, we conclude the follow-up to the letter in which the Rebbe discussed that matzah remains valid even beyond the year, as seen from the comparison to an Eruv which may be used for thirteen months in a leap year.
The Rebbe continues addressing the writer and comments on several of his proofs. One of the points discussed is that matzah must have a ta’am, a recognizable taste. The writer had brought a proof from the Gemara in Chullin 120a, but the Rebbe notes that this is not the most accurate source for that point.
Instead, the Rebbe suggests that the Gemara in Brachos 38b more clearly establishes that matzah requires a taste. In the case discussed in Chullin, the issue is not primarily that the matzah lacks taste, but rather that once it is dissolved, it may no longer be considered lechem oni, or even bread altogether, depending on the circumstances.
The Rebbe therefore distinguishes between two separate concepts: one is the requirement that matzah retain its form and status as bread, and another is that it must have a discernible taste. The clearer proof for the necessity of taste is found in Brachos, not Chullin.
The Rebbe continues with additional sources and analysis, examining the arguments presented and refining them with greater precision. These discussions are more detailed and suited for deeper study in the original texts.
Summary
The Rebbe clarifies that matzah must retain a proper taste and that the correct source for this is Gemara Brachos. He distinguishes between loss of taste and loss of the halachic status of bread, emphasizing precision in sources and understanding.