Earlier in the mascheta minchas chotei and minchas kanaus were mentioned together, as different from the other mincha offerings. On today's daf, only minchas chotei is mentioned. Was minchas kanaus deliberately not mentioned this time? If so, why? Thank you for clarifying this.
Yitzchak Metchik, Boston U.S.A.
This is a very perceptive question and I have not yet seen that any of the commentators ask it.
1) I would like to suggest that there is a difference between the discussion in our Gemara and the discussion earlier in the Masechta. In the first Mishnah (2a) we learn that all Minchah offerings that were offered without the special intention for that offering are valid, with the exception of Minchas Chotei and Minchas Kana'us. The Gemara (4a) says that we understand why Minchas Chotei is not valid -- because it is called a "Chatas" by the Torah and we know that a Chatas without the special intention is not valid. However, why is Minchas Kana'us without special intention also not valid? The Gemara answers this question by finding a way to compare Minchas Chotei and Minchas Kana'us. We do observe from the Gemara, though, that it is not obvious that Minchas Chotei and Minchas Kana'us possess identical laws unless we can prove that they do.
2) However, in our Gemara (end of 10b), it is different. We seek to know whether it is obvious that for a Minchas Chotei the Kemitzah must not be performed with the left hand. The Gemara states that this is not in fact obvious, because Rebbi Shimon said that one should be careful not to make the Minchas Chotei beautiful, since it is offered by a sinner because he sinned. Just as the Minchas Chotei should not be beautiful, so also there is good reason to assume that is possible to do Kemitzah with the left hand; since an honorable Minchah is not required, the left hand should be sufficient. The Gemara states that we therefore require the Gezeirah Shavah of "Yad-Yad" to teach that the right hand must be used for Kemitzah.
3) However, with respect to not making it beautiful, the Minchas Chotei and Minchas Kana'us are exactly the same. The Minchas Kana'us is also offered by a sinner, and Rashi in Bamidbar 5:15 writes that this is the reason why one should not pour oil onto it -- so that it should not be beautiful.
4) I therefore suggest that since Minchas Chotei and Minchas Kana'us are identical in the respect that they should not be beautiful, it follows that when the Gemara (10b) mentions Minchas Chotei, it is no longer necessary to mention Minchas Kana'us because the two are identical in this respect. This is not similar to the Gemara earlier (4a) where it was not obvious that the two are identical, and it was therefore necessary to mention both of them explicitly.
Wishing you a Kesivah v'Chasimah Tovah, and a good New Year,
Dovid Bloom