Are women obligated to hear the Torah reading of Parashat Zakhor (Deut. 25:17-19) in the synagogue on the Shabbat before Purim?

Responsa in a Moment

Volume 20, Number 3
February 2026

Are women obligated to hear the Torah reading of Parashat Zakhor (Deut. 25:17-19) in the synagogue on the Shabbat before Purim?
(Orah Hayyim 685:7)

By Rabbi David Golinkin

In memory of Prof. Gabi Barkay z”l (1944-2026)
Who passed away on 22 Tevet 5786.
Born in the Ghetto of Budapest, he remembered what Amalek did to us
and he helped us remember the history of Eretz Yisrael
from the First Temple period until today.
May his memory be for a blessing!

Question from a Conservative/Masorti rabbi in Israel: Are women obligated to hear the Torah reading of Parashat Zakhor (Deut. 25:17-19) in the synagogue on the Shabbat before Purim?

Responsum:
In this responsum, we will not discuss the historical and philosophical importance of remembering Amalek, since we have already published a detailed responsum on that topic twenty years ago (Golinkin, 2006). We will, rather, reply to the specific question which we were asked.

We are instructed in the Torah (Deut. 25:17–19):

17. Remember what Amalek did to you on your journey, after you left Egypt. 18. How he met you on the way and attacked the stragglers in your rear, when you were faint and weary, and he did not fear God. 19. Therefore, when the Lord your God grants you rest from all your enemies around you, in the land that the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance to possess, you shall blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven — do not forget.

In other words, it is clear that there is a mitzvah to remember what Amalek did to us on our journey after leaving Egypt — but it is not clear exactly how or when.

On the other hand, we have learned in Mishnah Megillah 3, 4:

If Rosh Ḥodesh Adar falls on Shabbat, we read the portion of Shekalim… On the second [Shabbat], Zakhor; on the third, the Red Heifer; on the fourth, “This month shall be for you…”

In other words, the Mishnah establishes that four parshiyot [Biblical passages] are to be read before Passover, and the second of these is Parashat Zakhor. Rashi explains in his commentary to Megillah 29a, s.v. u’mafsikin: “In order that Parashat Zakhor be read on the Shabbat adjacent to Purim, to juxtapose the eradication of Amalek with the eradication of Haman.” This is certainly correct, yet the precise relationship between Deuteronomy 25 and this Mishnah remains unclear. This ambiguity has led to different interpretations concerning the nature of the halakhic obligation.

Usually, in my responsa, I present the range of opinions first and only afterward state my own opinion. In this case, however—because there are numerous contradictory views—I have chosen to present my own conclusion first, based on the halakhic Midrashim and on five major Rishonim [medieval authorities].

I. There is a positive, non–time-bound commandment to verbally remember “what Amalek did to you on your journey after you left Egypt.” Therefore, women are obligated in this mitzvah. At some point, the Sages either had a custom or instituted the custom of reading Parashat Zakhor on the Shabbat before Purim, in order to ensure that everyone remembers Amalek at least once a year; and anyone who is obligated by this mitzvah —including women—is also obligated to hear this reading.

This is what we learn from the halakhic Midrashim of the Tannaim and from five major medieval authorities:

1. We have learned in the Sifra, at the beginning of Parashat Beḥukkotai (ed. Venice, 1545, fol. 56b = ed. A.H. Weiss, Vienna 1862, fol. 110c, though the latter contains one error):

…Similarly, it says: “Remember what Amalek did to you”—might this be in your heart? When it says “do not forget”, this refers to forgetting in the heart. How, then, do I fulfill “Remember”? That you must utter with your mouth.

In other words, one is obligated to verbally remember what Amalek did, but no time-frame is given, and it’s clear from the context that there is no specific obligation to read Parashat Zakhor from Deuteronomy 25 on the Shabbat before Purim.

2. And so have we learned in Sifrei Devarim, Piska 296 (ed. Finkelstein, p. 314):

“Remember” — in the mouth. “Do not forget” — in the heart.

3. And so have we learned in Midrash Tannaim to Deut. 25:17 (ed. Rabbi David Zvi Hoffmann, p. 169):

“Remember” — in the mouth. You might say: “remember” in the mouth or “remember” only in the heart? But when it says “do not forget,” this refers to forgetting in the heart. What, then, does “Remember” teach? That you must utter with your mouth.

4. A later source, in Megillah 18a, begins with a gezerah shavah [learning from similar words] taught by the Amora Rava (Babylonia, 4th generation), and then proceeds to cite the Tannaitic midrash quoted above:

We have learned in the Mishnah (ibid., fol. 17a) that if one recites the Megillah by heart — one does not fulfill the obligation. The Talmud asks:

From what verse do we know this? Rava said: It is learned from the repetition of the word “remember.” It’s written here (Esther 9:28), “and these days shall be remembered,” and it is written there (Exodus 17:14, regarding Amalek), “Write this as a remembrance in a book.” Just as there [Amalek] in a book, so too here [Megillah] in a book.

And how do we know that this “remembrance” is reading? Perhaps it refers only to contemplation? Do not think so, for it was taught in a Baraita (on Deut. 25:17): “Remember”—might this be in your heart? When it says, “do not forget,” this refers to forgetting in the heart. How, then, do I fulfill “Remember?” In the mouth.

In other words, in order to prove that the Megillah must be read from a book, Rava creates a gezerah shavah from the Amalek passage in Exodus 17. The anonymous editor of the Talmud then cites the same Baraita we saw earlier, which derives from the word “Remember” in Deuteronomy 25 that one must remember Amalek in the mouth and not just in the heart.

Admittedly, the reasoning is difficult, since writing something in a book and speaking something aloud are not the same. In any case, based on this Talmudic passage, one could perhaps argue that one must read Parashat Zakhor in Deuteronomy 25 from a book, but this still does not prove that one must read Parashat Zakhor in a minyan on the Shabbat before Purim.

Now let us turn to the Rishonim:

1. Maimonides (1135–1204) cites and relies on the Sifra  and Sifrei  passages noted above in three places: Laws of Kings 5:5; Sefer Hamitzvot, Positive Commandment 189; and Negative Commandment 59. This was already emphasized in the fourteenth century by R. Shem Tov ibn Gaon in his Migdal Oz commentary to the Laws of Kings. In all these places, Maimonides stresses that one is obligated to remember what Amalek did to us

And in Sefer HaMitzvot 189 he adds: “Do you not see what the prophet Samuel did when he came to fulfill this commandment? He first remembered [Amalek’s deed], and only afterward commanded that they be killed, as it is said: ‘I have remembered what Amalek did to Israel’ (I Samuel 15:2).” In other words, there is no connection between remembering Amalek verbally and Parashat Zakhor.

Furthermore, when Maimonides rules in the Laws of Prayer 13:20 that one must read the four special Torah portions on the basis of Mishnah Megillah cited earlier, he does not quote the Sifra or Sifrei. Thus, for Maimonides there indeed exists a commandment to verbally remember what Amalek did to you — but there is no direct halakhic connection between this Biblical commandment and the reading of Parashat Zakhor on the Shabbat before Purim.

Finally, Maimonides explains in Sefer HaMitzvot, at the end of Shoresh 14 (ed. Rambam La’am, p. 52): “When I list the commandments that are not obligatory for women, whether positive or negative, I will say: ‘and this is not obligatory for women.’” Since he did not make such a statement regarding the commandments “Remember” and “Do not forget,” it follows that women are obligated in these commandments just like men.

2. Rabbi Moses of Coucy, author of the Sefer Mitzvot Gadol (Positive Commandments 116, Venice 1547, fol. 192a; France and Spain, ca. 1236), paraphrases Maimonides’ ruling in the Laws of Kings: “It’s a positive commandment to remember always his wicked deeds and his ambush on the road, to arouse perpetual enmity toward him, and maintain wrath against him forever, as it is said: ‘Remember what Amalek did to you.’” He then cites the aforementioned Baraita from Megillah 18a. In other words, there is a positive commandment to constantly remember what Amalek did—but he makes no mention whatsoever of the practice of reading Parashat Zakhor before Purim.

3. Nahmanides (Ramban) (Barcelona, c. 1194 – c. 1270) likewise quotes the Sifra and Sifrei passages in his commentary to Deuteronomy 24:9 and again to 25:17. In the latter passage, he asks: “I do not know what this verbal remembrance consists of, unless it is to say that we should read the section of Amalek publicly, and we should learn: ‘On the second [Shabbat], Zakhor’ (Mishnah Megillah loc. cit.) from the Torah?” He then rejects his suggestion and states that there is no direct connection between the biblical obligation to remember verbally and reading Parashat Zakhor: “The correct explanation in my opinion is that [the verse] commands us not to forget what Amalek did to us until we blot out his name from under Heaven, and that we must recount this to our children and to future generations, saying to them: ‘Thus did this evildoer to us,’ and therefore we were commanded to eradicate his memory.”

4. Sefer Hahinukh is traditionally attributed to R. Aharon Halevi of Barcelona in the thirteenth century, but Prof. Israel Ta‑Shma demonstrated some 45 years ago (Kiryat Sefer 55, 5740, pp. 787–790) that the author was actually his brother, R. Pinḥas Halevi of Barcelona, a younger contemporary of Nahmanides in Barcelona. Sefer Hhinukh (Mitzvah 603 in the standard editions = Mitzvah 597 in the Chavel edition) cites the above passage from Sifrei Devarim, and continues:

Regarding this remembrance, both in the heart and in the mouth, we do not know of any fixed time in the year or in the day—unlike the commandment to remember the Exodus from Egypt every day and every night… It is sufficient for us to remember this matter once a year, or once every two or three years. And behold, in all Jewish communities the Torah is read in its entirety over the course of one year, or two, or at most three [in reference to the triennial cycle]; thus, they thereby fulfill this mitzvah.

And perhaps we may say that the custom of the Jewish people to read Parashat Zakhor each year on a designated Shabbat is “Torah,” and that it was established for the sake of fulfilling this mitzvah; and it is always on the Shabbat that precedes Purim…

In other words, like Maimonides, Rabbi Moses of Coucy and Nahmanides, the author of the Sefer Hahinukh states that the commandment to remember Amalek does not have a fixed time in the year or in the day, but he adds that perhaps this is the basis for the custom of reading Parashat Zakhor before Purim each year. (But see below, section IV for his view re. the obligation of women to read Parashat Zakhor.)

5. Rabbi Israel Isserlein wrote in Terumat Hadeshen, No. 108, following the view of the Rosh (see below), that the reading of Parashat Zakhor with a minyan constitutes a Biblical positive commandment. However, his close disciple, R. Yozl of Hochstadt, reports in Leket Yosher as follows (ed. Kinarti, vol. 1, p. 347; cf. a corrupted version in the Freimann edition, vol. 1, p. 153): “He wrote in his book [= Terumat Hadeshen] and preached that every person must be careful to come to a minyan for Parashat Zakhor, more than for the reading of the Megillah, because it’s a positive commandment in the Sefer Mitzvot Katan (see below) to remember Amalek. Nevertheless, the time is rabbinic…” These last five words do not appear in Terumat Hadeshen, but this approach is consistent with all the sources cited in this section.

In other words, according to the Tannaitic sources and the five major Rishonim cited above, remembering Amalek is a positive mitzvah that is not time‑bound, and therefore women are obligated. Subsequently, the Sages had the custom —or enacted —that Parashat Zakhor should be read on the Shabbat before Purim to ensure that every Jew remembers Amalek at least once per year, and whoever is obligated by the mitzvah – including women – is likewise obligated in this reading.

Indeed, several Aḥaronim [later authorities] have suggested this approach, each in his own way: Rabbi Avraham Gombiner (Poland–Lithuania, 1637–1682) in his Magen Avraham to Shulḥan Arukh Orah Hayyim 685, s.v. “V’li nireh leyashev minhag ha’olam”; Rabbi Yosef Babad; Rabbi Ya’akov Ettlinger; Rabbi Yehudah Leib Diskin; and Rabbi Ḥayyim Elazar Shapira.

Moreover, what happened here is very similar to the explanation we offered regarding Maimonides’ view of women and prayer. We summarized his approach as follows (Golinkin, 2012, p. 96): “Originally, Tefillah was a positive commandment without a fixed time that women were obligated by the Torah to observe. When Ezra and his court came and enacted a fixed formula and fixed times for Tefillah, the enactment also included women who were Biblically obligated to pray.” Indeed, Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef also compared the two topics in Yalkut Yosef, Mo‘adim, Laws of Purim, p. 135, note 17.

II. Aharonim who ruled that women are Biblically obligated to hear Parashat Zakhor, and the principle of Ma‘aseh Rav – [action serves as a precedent]

There is a well‑known halakhic principle that I have discussed several times: ma‘aseh rav – action serves as a precedent (Golinkin, 2012, pp. 251, 292, and elsewhere). In other words, when important rabbis—or the Jewish people as a whole—have adopted a particular practice, that practice itself becomes precedent. Indeed, regarding our topic, there are several major rabbinic authorities who ruled that women are obligated to hear Parashat Zakhor in the synagogue on the Shabbat before Purim, and this was the actual practice in many Jewish communities:

Rabbi Yaakov Ettlinger (Altona, 1798-1871) reports in the name of his teacher, Rabbi Avraham Bing (Würzburg, 1752–1841), who in turn heard it from his teacher Rabbi Nathan Adler (Frankfurt, 1741–1800; he was also the primary teacher of the Ḥatam Sofer): “That women are obligated, and that he was strict that even his maidservant was required to hear Parashat Zakhor—and I conducted myself according to his ruling.”

Rabbi Ḥayyim Elazar Shapira of Munkatch (1871–1937) likewise ruled in his work Minḥat Elazar that women are obligated to hear Parashat Zakhor in the synagogue and so his student reported in Darkhei Ḥayyim Veshalom: “Our teacher’s custom was to caution the women of his household to go to the synagogue on the Shabbat of Parashat Zakhor so that they would hear the Torah reading of Parashat Zakhor, which is a Biblical commandment.”

Similarly, Rabbi Yehudah Leib Diskin (Russia and Jerusalem, 1818–1898) ruled that women are Biblically obligated to hear Parashat Zakhor.

Rabbi Yitzchak Ya’akov Weiss (Galicia, Manchester, Jerusalem, 1902–1989) was not enthusiastic about the practice of reading Parashat Zakhor especially for women before Minḥah on Shabbat, but he nevertheless reports incidentally: “In practice, they held according to most of the poskim that women are obligated to hear this Torah portion, and thus the custom has spread in most communities that women come to the synagogue to hear the reading of Parashat Zakhor.”

Rabbi Yitzchak Isaac Liebes likewise testified in 1983: “Both women and young girls are accustomed to go to the synagogue to hear the reading [of Parashat Zakhor].”

We shall now present additional approaches to this topic:

III. There is a Biblical mitzvah to read Parashat Zakhor with a minyan on the Shabbat before Purim

This approach is briefly stated by in many of the Rishonim. If it is correct, then the reading of Parashat Zakhor constitutes a time‑bound positive commandment, and women would therefore be exempt. Here are the sources:

Tosafot to Berakhot 13a, s.v. bilshon hakodesh which was followed by the Beit Yosef and Shulḥan Arukh, Orah Ḥayyim 685:7; Tosafot of Rabbeinu Yehudah Sirléon to Berakhot 13a, s.v. bekhol lashon ne’emrah (ed. Zaks, Jerusalem 1969, p. 161); Tosafot to Megillah 17b, s.v. kol hatorah; Tosafot Sens to Sotah 33a (Vilna edition); Tosafot Harosh to Berakhot 13a, s.v. kol hatorah kullah; Tosafot Harosh to Berakhot 47b, s.v. mitzvat derabbim shani = Piskei Harosh, Berakhot 47b, chapter 7, paragraph 20; Tosafot Harosh to Sotah 32b, s.v. leima kesavar Rebbi; Hiddushei Harashba to Berakhot 13a, s.v. leima kesavar; Hiddushei Haritva to Megillah 17b, s.v. gemara.

Rabbeinu Yitzḥak of Corbeil, Sefer Mitzvot Katan, No. 147;

Rabbi Yisrael Isserlein, Terumat Hadeshen, No. 108, following the view of Piskei Harosh cited above.

However, as I have arranged the list above, most of the sources mentioned are simply different versions of a single paragraph written by the Tosafists. In any case, most of them provide no textual basis for this claim—except for the Ritva, who alludes in four words to the passage in Megillah 18a cited above. Yet, as we have already seen, that passage may imply that one must read Parashat Zakhor in Deuteronomy from a written text, but it contains no indication whatsoever that this must be done with a minyan on the Shabbat before Purim.

In other words, although this opinion is widespread, to the best of my knowledge, it has no Talmudic source.

IV. Women are exempt from this mitzvah because they do not go out to war

At the end of his discussion in Sefer Hahinukh, cited above, Rabbi Pinḥas Halevi of Barcelona writes:

This commandment applies in every place and at all times to males, for they are the ones to wage war and take vengeance on the enemy, not the women.

Rabbi Shimon Sofer offered a similar explanation, without referencing Sefer Hahinukh. However, many authorities have expressed surprise at the statement in Sefer Hahinukh. Rabbi Yosef Babad already emphasized in his Minḥat Ḥinnukh (ad loc.) that the Mishnah in Sotah 8:7 and Maimonides in Laws of Kings 7:4 have already ruled that in a milḥemet mitzvah, a commanded war, everyone goes out — “even a bridegroom from his chamber and a bride from her canopy.” (We have already elaborated on a related topic in another responsum — Golinkin, 2024). Thus, even if there is a connection between remembering Amalek and going out to battle, women are obligated.

Second, Rabbi Ya’akov Ettlinger already emphasized that Sefer Hahinukh lists the eradication of Amalek’s seed as a separate commandment (Mitzvah 604 in the standard editions = 598 in the Chavel edition). He then expresses surprise: If women are exempt from the commandment to eradicate the remembrance of Amalek, that does not mean that they are exempt from the commandment to remember what Amalek did!

Rabbi Shneur Zalmen Fradkin raised both of these questions in his responsa Torat Ḥesed.

And Rabbi Avraham Yitzḥak Klein challenged the Sefer Hahinukh by citing Midrash Tannaim referenced above, as well as the Mishnah that states that women are obligated to participate in a milḥemet mitzvah.

Therefore, with all due respect, there is no halakhic basis for the statement quoted above from Sefer Hahinukh.

V. Aharonim who ruled that women are exempt from hearing Parashat Zakhor in the synagogue

Several Aḥaronim ruled that women are exempt from hearing Parashat Zakhor in the synagogue. Among them are Rabbi Yehudah Najar in Limudei Hashem; Rabbi Yehudah Ayash in Mateh Yehudah; Rabbi Ḥanoch Henich Eigesh in Marḥeshet; Rabbi Avraham Bornstein in Avnei Nezer; Rabbi Shneor Zalmen Fradkin in Torat Ḥesed; and Rabbi Shimon Sofer in Hitorerut Teshuvah. (A clear and useful summary of these opinions appears in Rabbi Ovadia Yosef’s Ḥazon Ovadia, note 17.) In my opinion, their arguments are not convincing, and I will provide only one example.

After an in-depth discussion, Rabbi Fradkin retreats from his earlier analysis and concludes that since, Biblically, the commandment has no fixed time, and since the reading of Parashat Zakhor in the synagogue is a rabbinic enactment, women may fulfill their obligation through simple remembrance or recounting the story without a Torah scroll: “It’s not appropriate to be stringent in this matter and require them to hear the public Torah reading of Parashat Zakhor.” He is also concerned that women may enter the men’s section in order to hear the reading (Rabbi Elazar Shapira later expressed surprise at this strange idea.) Rabbi Fradkin concludes: “And the custom of Israel is Torah, and we have never seen or heard anyone who required women to hear the public Torah reading of Parashat Zakhor.” In other words, he rules according to the local custom in his community and his sociological assessment, rather than according to the many sources that he himself had cited earlier.

VI. Women are not Biblically obligated, but it’s desirable for them to come to the synagogue to hear Parashat Zakhor

This compromise position has been suggested in our time by Rabbi Ovadia Yosef; his son, Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef; Rabbi Ḥayyim David Halevi; and Rabbi Eliezer Melamed. However, in light of the Tannaitic midrashim and the statements of the Rishonim cited above, I see no basis for ruling in this manner.

VII. Summary and Practical Halakhah

“Remember what Amalek did to you” verbally is a positive commandment that has no fixed time; therefore, women are Biblically obligated by this mitzvah.

At some point, the Sages had a custom or instituted a custom of reading Parashat Zakhor before Purim, most likely to ensure that everyone would have an opportunity to fulfill this mitzvah. Anyone who is Biblically obligated in the commandment is likewise obligated in the rabbinic custom, including women.

Ma‘aseh rav – action serves as a precedent. This was the ruling and the actual custom of renowned rabbis such as Rabbi Nathan Adler, Rabbi Avraham Bing, Rabbi Yehudah Leib Diskin, and Rabbi Ḥayyim Elazar Shapira of Munkatch; and this was and is the actual practice of numerous Jewish communities as emphasized by Rabbi Weiss and Rabbi Liebes and as we see across the Jewish world today.

Therefore, women are obligated to come to the synagogue on Shabbat Zakhor in order to hear Parashat Zakhor, just like men.

David Golinkin
Jerusalem
5 Adar 5786

Bibliography (Aharonim)

Since most of the bibliography on this topic is in Hebrew, I have listed it in Hebrew. When an item exists in English, I have listed it in English.

אייגעש – הרב חנוך העניך אייגעש, ספר מרחשת, חלק א’, בילגורייא, תרצ”א, סימן כ”ב

א”ת – אנציקלופדיה תלמודית, כרך י”ב, טורים רי”ח-רכ”ג, ערך זכירת מעשה עמלק

באב”ד – הרב יוסף באב”ד, מנחת חינוך, לעמבערג, תרכ”ט ועוד, מצוות תרג-תרד

בורנשטיין – הרב אברהם בורנשטיין מסאכאטשוב, שאלות ותשובות אבני נזר, אורח חיים, חלק א’, אורח חיים, פיעטרקוב, תרע”ב, סימן תק”ט

במברגר – הרב שמחה הלוי במברגר, זכר שמחה, פרנקפורט דמיין, תרפה, סימן ע”ה

Golinkin, 2006 — David Golinkin, “Are Jews Still Commanded to Blot out the Memory of Amalek?”, in: David Golinkin, Insight Israel: The View from Schechter, Second Series, Jerusalem, 2006, pp. 59-67

Golinkin, 2012 – David Golinkin, The Status of Women in Jewish Law: Responsa, Jerusalem, 2012

Golinkin, 2024 – “Does Jewish law require yeshiva students to be drafted at age 18?”, Responsa in a Moment, Vol. VI, Jerusalem, 2024, pp. 61-81

גרויבארט – הרב יהודה ליב גרויבארט, חבלים בנעימים, חלק ג’, ירושלים, תשל”ה, סימן ל”ו, סעיף ב

גרינבלט – הרב אפרים גרינבלט, רבבות אפרים, ניו יורק, תשם, תשמ”ה
          חלק ג’, סימן תס”ב
          חלק ד’, סוף סימן מ”ג
          חלק ד’, סימן ק”ע

דיסקין – הרב משה יהודה ליב דיסקין, שו”ת מהרי”ל דיסקין, מהדורה מחודשת, ירושלים, תשע”ט,  קונטרס אחרון, סימן ק”ב

הורוויץ – הרב אברהם יעקב הלוי הורוויץ, שאלות ותשובות צור יעקב, חלק א’, בילגורייא, תרצ”ב, סימן ס”ח

הלוי – הרב חיים דוד הלוי, ספר מקור חיים לבנות ישראל, תל אביב, תשל”ז, עמ’ 138 והערה 5

וייס – הרב יצחק יעקב וייס, שאלות ותשובות מנחת יצחק, חלק ט’, ירושלים, תשנ”ג, סימן ס”ח

טרונק – הרב ישראל יהושע טרונק מקוטנא, שאלות ותשובות ישועות מלכו, פיעטרקוב, תרפ”ז, סימן נ

יוסף – הרב יצחק יוסף
ילקוט יוסף: מועדים, ירושלים, תשמ”ח, עמ’ ר”ס-רס”א
אוצר דינים לאשה ולבת, ירושלים, תשמ”ט, עמ’ רנ”ה-רנ”ו
קיצור שלחן ערוך ילקוט יוסף, מהדורה שנייה, כרך ב’, ירושלים, תשס”ו, אורח חיים תרפ”ה:י”ד, עמ’ שצ”ה-שצ”ו
ילקוט יוסף: מועדים: הלכות פורים, ירושלים, תש”פ, עמ’ קל”ה-קל”ח

יוסף – הרב עובדיה יוסף
יחוה דעת, מהדורה שנייה, חלק א’, ירושלים, תשל”ז, סימן פ”ד
יביע אומר, חלק ח’, ירושלים, תשנ”ה, חלק אורח חיים, סימן נ”ד (12 עמודים!)
חזון עובדיה: פורים, ירושלים, תשס”ג, עמ’ ט-יא 

ליעבעס – הרב יצחק אייזיק ליעבעס, שאלות ותשובות בית אב”י, חלק רביעי, ניו יורק, תשמ”ה, חלק ד’, סימן ג

מדיני – הרב חזקיהו מדיני, שדי חמד, מהדורת שניאורסאהן, ניו יורק, תשיב, חלק א’, עמ’ 171; חלק ג’, עמ’ 1277; חלק ו’, עמ’ 2761

מלמד – הרב אליעזר מלמד, פניני הלכה: תפילת נשים, מהדורה שלישית, הר ברכה, תשע”ב, עמ’ 274-273

נג’אר – הרב יהודה נג’אר, למודי ה’, ליוורונו, תקמ”ז, לימוד קמ”ב, המובא על ידי הרב יעקב חיים סופר והרב עובדיה יוסף

סופר – הרב יעקב חיים סופר, כף החיים לאורח חיים תרפ”ה, אות ל

סופר – הרב שמעון סופר, התעוררות תשובה, חלק א’, ירושלים, תשל”ד, סימן ה

עטלינגר – הרב יעקב עטלינגר, שאלות ותשובות בנין ציון החדשות, ווילנא, תרל”ח, סימן ח

עייאש – הרב יהודה עייאש, מטה יהודה, ליוורנו, תקמ”ג, על אורח חיים רפב, סעיף ז’ באמצע

  פרדקין – הרב שניאור זלמן פרדקין, שאלות ותשובות תורת חסד, ווארשא, תרמג, חלק אורח חיים, סימן ל”ז

קליין – הרב אברהם צבי קליין, בארות אברהם, טירנאו, תרפ”ח, סימן ל”ט

שטינברג – הרב משה הלוי שטינברג, הלכות נשים, ירושלים, תשמ”ג, עמ’ 86

שפירא – הרב חיים אלעזר שפירא ממונקאטש
דרכי חיים ושלום, נערך בידי יחיאל מיכל גאלד, מונקאטש, תש, עמ’ של”א, סימן תתל”ה
שאלות ותשובות מנחת אלעזר, חלק א’, מונקאטש, תרס”ז, סימן א

שפירא – הרב יהושע צבי מיכל שפירא, ספר ציץ הקדש, חלק א’, ירושלים, תר”פ, סימן נ”א

(image: Torah reading, THDju CCA-SA 3.0 via wikicommons)

To Purchase Rabbi Golinkin’s Volumes of Responsa: CLICK HERE