R. Shimon said: Is this so? (i.e., Is this the derivation?) Is it not written "You shall not eat upon it chametz" — "seven days shall you eat upon it matzoth"? Whoever is subsumed in "eat matzoh" is subsumed in "You shall not eat chametz" and whoever is not subsumed in "eat matzoh" is not subsumed in "You shall not eat chametz."
"the bread of affliction": to exclude chalut (a paste stirred in hot water) and pan-cakes.
I might think that one could fulfill his obligation (of "bread of affliction") only with flour of the second course; it is, therefore, written "You shall eat matzoth upon it" — even the (extra fine) matzoh of King Solomon. If so, why is it written "bread of affliction"? To exclude chalut and pan-cakes.