Tafsiran Imamat 1:4: Rashi, Kli Yakar, Ramban & Tur HaArokh

על ראש העולה UPON THE HEAD OF THE BURNT OFFERING — This is intended to include an obligatory burnt offering also in the law of סמיכה (laying hands on the head of the sacrifice) as well as to include a sheep that is offered as a free — will burnt offering (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Chapter 4 3-5).

And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the burnt offering. The verse mentions one hand, while regarding the scapegoat it is written, And Aaron shall lay both his hands. Ramban explained that even the laying of hands on the burnt offering was done with both hands. But what can I do, since the verse clearly mentions only one hand?
What seems most probable to me is that every sin of thought is without action, but every sin of action is not without the thought that precedes the action. Without this prior thought, one would not intend to sin at all, and it would be considered accidental rather than unintentional. Therefore, for the burnt offering which comes for thoughts alone, it is sufficient to lay one hand to transfer the blemish and taint of the sin of thought onto the animal. But for the scapegoat which bears the iniquities of the children of Israel — both sins of thought and action — Aaron laid both his hands upon it to transfer the blemish and taint of these two types of sin.

AND HE SHALL LAY HIS HAND. This means his two hands, for we find it stated: and Aaron and his sons shall lay their hands upon the head of the bullock;⁵⁶Exodus 29:10. and Aaron and his sons shall lay their hands upon the head of the ram,⁵⁷Ibid., Verse 15. and the Rabbis interpreted it to mean: “the hands of each and every individual.”⁵⁸I.e., the word “hands” does not refer to “Aaron and his sons,” thus implying that each lay one hand, but to each individual laying his two hands on the offering. The source of this interpretation is unknown to me. Thus [it is clear that] both hands were required for it. In the case of the goat designed to be sent [to Azazel] it is expressly stated, And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat.⁵⁹Further, 16:21. If so, I do not know why Scripture wrote “his hand” [in the singular] in all other cases of the laying of hands. Perhaps it is for the purpose of deriving therefrom what the Rabbis have interpreted:⁶⁰Menachoth 93b. “His hand — and not the hand of his proxy.” For had it been written “his hands” [in the plural we would have interpreted it] to require the laying of both hands, and we would not have been able to exclude the proxy. But now that [we derive from other verses that] both hands must be laid upon the offering, [we must conclude that] He only wrote the singular [indicating the hands of only one person], to exclude a proxy, for although a man’s proxy is like the man himself⁶¹Kiddushin 41b. in all other places, we should not consider him so in the case of the laying of hands. In Torath Kohanim we find:⁶²Torath Kohanim, Acharei 4:4. “And Aaron shall lay both his hands.⁵⁹Further, 16:21. This teaches that the laying of hands upon the offering must be done with both hands, and forms the general rule for all cases of laying of hands, that they be done with both hands.”