A Kohen who killed someone in battle – may he recite Birkat Kohanim (the Priestly Blessing)? 

Responsa in a Moment

Volume 20, Number 1

October 2025

A Kohen who killed someone in battle – may he recite Birkat Kohanim (the Priestly Blessing)?
(Orah Hayyim 128:35 ) 

By Rabbi David Golinkin

With feelings of joy over the release of our hostages from Gaza.
May God enable us to give a proper Jewish burial to all the bodies which remain there.

* * *

A note of explanation for Jews in the Diaspora: Outside of Israel, Kohanim usually recite Birkat Kohanim in the loud repetition of the Amidah only on Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur and the three pilgrim festivals. In Israel, Kohanim recite Birkat Kohanim every day. Hence the importance of the question below. DG.

* * *

A question from a soldier who served approximately 400 days of reserve duty in Gaza: I am a Kohen, and during my army service I had to kill terrorists. We would enter a building, they would fire at us, and we would return fire and kill them. We also blew up tunnels or tunnel entrances, and presumably killed additional terrorists without knowing how many. Am I permitted to recite Birkat Kohanim (the Priestly Blessing)?

Responsum:

I. The stringent approach of the Babylonian Talmud and those who ruled accordingly

It is written in the Book of Isaiah 1:10–15:

10 Hear the word of the Lord, you rulers of Sodom; listen to the teaching of our God, you people of Gomorrah. 11 “What do I care for the multitude of your sacrifices?” says the Lord. “I am sated with burnt offerings of rams and the fat of fattened animals; the blood of bulls, lambs, and goats I do not desire. 12 When you come to appear before Me, who asked this of you, to trample My courts? 13 Do not continue bringing worthless offerings; incense is an abomination to Me. New moon and Sabbath, the calling of assemblies — I cannot endure iniquity combined with solemn gathering. 14 Your new moons and your appointed festivals My soul hates; they have become a burden to Me, I am weary of bearing them. 15 And when you spread out your hands, I will hide My eyes from you; even though you multiply prayers, I will not listen — your hands are full of blood.

According to the biblical parallelism within verse 15, the prophet Isaiah is saying that when the people of Israel pray to God, He will not listen because they have killed people or committed serious sins.

Indeed, in the Babylonian Talmud, Berakhot 32b (and from there in Yalkut Shimoni on Isaiah, end of paragraph 387, ed. Hyman, p. 10), Rabbi Elazar understood the phrase “when you spread out your hands” literally, as referring to prayer. But there is a second interpretation there:

Rabbi Yohanan said: Any Kohen who has killed a soul may not raise his hands [in the Priestly Blessing], as it is written: “[When you spread out your hands…] your hands are full of blood.”

It is worth noting that the reading “Rabbi Yohanan said” appears only in printed editions of the Talmud beginning with the Soncino edition of 1484. Most of the early authorities who cite this passage do so without attribution, while in the manuscripts and among the Geonim and Rishonim — such as Halakhot Gedolot and the Rif — the reading is: “Rabbi Elazar said.”(1)

In any case, the Babylonian Talmud understood the beginning of the verse as referring to the priestly spreading of hands for Birkat Kohanim, and the phrase “your hands are full of blood” literally, as referring to murderers. That is, if the Kohanim kill a soul, God will hide His eyes from them, and therefore they may not recite the Priestly Blessing.

And so ruled Rabbi Shimon Kayara (Sura, Babylonia, ca. 825) in Halakhot Gedolot, Hilkhot Kohanim (ed. Warsaw, 1875, fol. 45c = ed. Hildesheimer, Jerusalem, 1972, Part I, p. 467):

Rabbi Elazar said [this is his reading in Berakhot]: Any Kohen who has killed a soul may not raise his hands, as it is written: “Your hands are full of blood.”

And so ruled Rav Hai Gaon (Pumbedita, Babylonia, 939–1038) in slightly different language in a letter to the Kohanim of Africa (Otzar Hageonim on Kiddushin, Responsa section, paragraph 419, p. 189): “Any Kohen who sheds blood may not ascend the platform [for the Priestly Blessing]” and then he quotes the verse from Isaiah 1:15.

And so ruled the Rif, Rabbi Isaac Alfasi (North Africa and Spain, 1013–1103), in his Halakhot on Tractate Megillah (Chapter Hakorei Omed, ed.  Vilna, folio 16a):

Rabbi Elazar said [this is his reading in Berakhot]: Any Kohen who has killed a soul may not raise his hands, as it is written: “Your hands are full of blood.”

Maimonides (Spain, Morocco, Egypt, 1138–1204) likewise ruled according to the Babylonian Talmud in Laws of Prayer and the Priestly Blessing 15:3: (2)

A Kohen who has killed a soul [even unintentionally] and even if he has repented, may not raise his hands, as it is written: “Your hands are full of blood,” and it is written: “When you spread out your hands…” etc.

And so ruled Rabbi Moses of Coucy (France, 1250) in Sefer Mitzvot Gadol, Mitzvot Aseh 20 (ed. Venice, fol. 104a):

Six things prevent a Kohen from performing the priestly blessing… One who has killed a soul, even unintentionally, may not raise his hands, as it is written: “Your hands are full of blood, and when you spread out your hands…” etc.

And so ruled Rabbi Yitzhak of Corbeil (d. 1280) in Sefer Mitzvot Katan, paragraph 113 (ed. Satmar, 1935, p. 88):

One who has killed a soul even unintentionally may not raise his hands, as it is written: “When you spread out your hands… your hands are full of blood.”

And so ruled Rabbi Aharon Hakohen of Lunel in Orḥot Ḥayyim, Laws of Priestly Blessing, paragraph 16, ed. Florence, 1750, fol. 109c = Kol Bo, paragraph 125, ed. David Avraham, Vol. 7, Jerusalem, 2002, p. 522), ca. 1300, following the aforementioned ruling of Maimonides:

A Kohen who has killed a soul may not raise his hands, even if he killed unintentionally, and even if he has repented.

And so ruled Rabbeinu Yeruham (Toledo, written in 1340), Netiv 3, part 6, ed. Venice, 1553, folio 27d = ed. Yair Hazzan, vol. 1, Jerusalem, 2019, p. 95:

A Kohen who has killed a soul may not raise his hands, because of “Your hands are full of blood.” This is clearly stated in Berakhot… and there are those who explain [i.e., Maimonides] — even if it was unintentional.

And so ruled Rabbi Ya’akov ben Asher (d. Toledo, 1340) in Tur Orah Hayyim 128 (Tur Hashalem, vol. 2, p. 18):

A Kohen who has killed a soul, even unintentionally, may not raise his hands, as it is written: “When you spread out your hands, I will hide My eyes from you; even though you multiply prayer, I will not listen — your hands are full of blood.”

And so ruled Rabbi Yosef Karo (Safed, 1555) in Shulhan Arukh, Orah Hayyim 128:35:

A Kohen who has killed a soul, even unintentionally, may not raise his hands, even if he has repented.

This was also the opinion of Rabbi Levi ibn Haviv (Spain, Jerusalem, and elsewhere, 1483–1545; Responsa Maharalbah, paragraph 117), regarding a Kohen who murdered a young man in Egypt, although he did not issue a clear ruling in order to avoid conflict with the rabbis of Egypt.

This was also emphasized by Rabbi David Halevi, the Taz (Poland, 1586–1667), in his commentary on Shulhan Arukh, Orah Hayyim 128, subparagraph 32. Since the verse states “even though you multiply prayer,” “it implies that repentance does not help.”

Thus, it seems that the halakhah is clear and straightforward: A Kohen who has killed a soul, even unintentionally, and even if he has repented, may not raise his hands to recite the Priestly Blessing.

II. The Lenient Approach of the Talmud Yerushalmi

However, the approach of the Talmud Yerushalmi is opposite to that of the Babylonian Talmud. It appears in Yerushalmi Gittin, Chapter 5 (Ms. Leiden, ed. Akademia, 5:8, col. 1078 = ed. Venice, 5:9, fol. 47b) and I am correcting the word in brackets based on the Ra’aviyah (paragraph 151, ed. Aptowitzer, vol. 1, p. 154) and the Beit Yosef (on Tur Orah Hayyim 128, s.v. kohen sheharag et hanefesh):

[Lest] you say: “So-and-so engages in illicit sexual intercourse and sheds blood — and he blesses us?!” Says God: “And who is blessing you? Is it not I who blesses you?” As it is written: “And they shall place My name upon the children of Israel, and I shall bless them” (Numbers 6:27).

In other words, according to the Yerushalmi, the behavior of the Kohen is irrelevant. The Kohen is merely a conduit, and the blessing comes from God Himself. The Rif ruled over 900 years ago that when there is a dispute between the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds, one rules according to the Babylonian Talmud (Hilkhot Harif, end of tractate Eruvin, ed. Vilna, fol. 35b). However, many early authorities, as we will see below, used the lenient approach of the Yerushalmi in order to limit the sweeping prohibition found in the Babylonian Talmud.

III. Limiting the Prohibition in the Period of the Rishonim and Aharonim

Indeed, during the period of the Rishonim (ca. 1000-1550), halakhic authorities began to limit the scope of the Babylonian Talmud’s ruling in Berakhot:

1. In two places in the Talmud (Yevamot 7a s.v. shene’emar and Sanhedrin 35b s.v. shene’emar), the Tosafists suggest in their first answer that the prohibition against [someone who killed reciting the] “priestly blessing is merely a stringency.” While this is not a formal halakhic ruling, we will see below that several Aharonim (later authorities) relied on this lenient approach.
2. The Ra’aviyah, Rabbi Eliezer ben Yoel Halevi (Ashkenaz, d. 1220; paragraph 1155, ed. Mekhon Harry Fischel, vol. 7, p. 365 = ed. Doblitsky, vol. 4, p. 267), (3) quotes the above-mentioned Yerushalmi Gittin and then asks how it can be reconciled with Berakhot. He replies: “There [in Berakhot] it refers to someone who is well-known [for murder], as a Mu’ad [a habitual murderer].”

His devoted disciple, Rabbi Yitzhak of Vienna, explains (Or Zarua, part 2, paragraph 412, ed. Zhitomir, 1862, folio 83d = ed. Mekhon Yerushalayim, 2010, vol. 2, p. 470): “But if someone shed blood or committed sexual immorality incidentally, and is not well-known or habitually sinful, such a person may raise his hands and it is perfectly acceptable.” He then quotes the Yerushalmi and concludes: “And this is the halakhah.”

This interpretation does not align with the plain meaning of the Babylonian Talmud, but many have cited it to adopt a more lenient position.

3. Rabbeinu Simhah of Speyer (d. ca. 1220) made a similar statement (Hagahot Maimoniyot on Maimonides, ad loc.; and Y.Z. Kahana, Rabbi Meir ben Baruch Maharam of Rothenburg: Teshuvot, Pesakim U’minhagim, vol. 1, Jerusalem, 1957, No. 41): “Rabbeinu Simhah also wrote that this only applies to someone who remains rebellious.” He too apparently relied on Yerushalmi Gittin. In other words, only a Kohen who repeatedly kills may not raise his hands, but if he did so only once, he is permitted to do so.

This interpretation also does not align with the plain meaning of the Babylonian Talmud.

4. Rabbeinu Shimshon ben Avraham of Sens (France, 1150 – before 1216, also known as the Rashba) replied in an oft-quoted responsum:(4)

A Kohen who circumcised a baby and the baby died, may still raise his hands in the priestly blessing. This is not comparable to the Kohen who killed a soul as discussed [in Berakhot], because that case refers to intentional killing, as it is written: “Your hands are full of blood.” And if you wish to say that the Talmud in Berakhot also refers to unintentional killing, this case is different, because [the mohel] acted with the intention of fulfilling a mitzvah…

In other words, even if the Talmud in Berakhot intended to include a Kohen who killed unintentionally, this case is different because the mohel acted for the sake of a mitzvah. This ruling was also codified in Shulhan Arukh, Orah Hayyim 128:36. We will return to this point below.

5. Rabbi Hezekiah de Silva (Italy and Jerusalem, 1659–1698) ruled in Peri Hadash on Orah Hayyim 128:35: “But if he was forced to kill, he may raise his hands.” This ruling is also cited in Ba’er Heitev, subparagraph 59. We will return to this point below.

6. The Tur and Beit Yosef, Orah Hayyim 128 cite many authorities, beginning with Rabbeinu Gershom and Rashi, who ruled that a Kohen who converted to Christianity and then repented is permitted to raise his hands. From this, the Rema (in both the long and short versions of Darkei Moshe) concluded: “It seems that the same applies to a Kohen who killed and repented, we rule that he may raise his hands, for he is no worse than a Kohen who converted.”

And so ruled the Rema in his glosses to Shulhan Arukh, Orah Hayyim 128:35: “Some say that if he repented, he may raise his hands. One should be lenient with penitents and not lock the door in their faces, and this is the custom.” Many later authorities quoted the Rema and agreed with his opinion — see the list in Keter Ephraim, p. 387.

IV. A soldier who is a Kohen who killed someone in the line of duty

Now we shall present the modern halakhic authorities who addressed our specific question directly: Is a Jewish soldier who is a Kohen and killed someone in the line of duty permitted to raise his hands in the Priestly Blessing?

In general, all the halakhic authorities who dealt with this issue ruled in the affirmative, but they arrived at this conclusion for very different reasons.

1. Rabbis Fried, Zarihan (in the question to Rabbi Uziel), Waldenberg, and Ovadia Yosef ruled that the prohibition does not apply to a Kohen who killed a non-Jew. Most of them rely on the Perishah by Rabbi Joshua Falk (Poland, 1555-1614) on Tur Orah Hayyim 128 (in uncensored versions such as in the Tur Hashalem; see Rabbi Waldenberg’s discussion of the history of censorship of this passage): “It seems to me [that the passage in Berakhot] is referring to a Jew, since the proof brought –‘Your hands are full of blood’ — refers to killing Jews.”

However, this approach is highly problematic in the eyes of many Jews today. First, as Rabbi Uziel emphasized, it is not at all clear that the verse in Isaiah refers only to Jews who killed other Jews.

Second, the Talmud in Berakhot says: “A Kohen who killed a nefesh [a soul]” and, as Rabbi Shimon Sofer explained some one hundred years ago: “This implies any soul whatsoever — whoever it may be — even if not Jewish.”

Moreover, Rabbis Ovadia Yosef and Waldenberg quote Rabbi Yissachar Ber Eilenburg (author of Be’er Sheva, Poland and Moravia, 1570–1623) in his work Tzeidah Laderekh on Rashi to Parashat Mishpatim (folio 69a). He learned from the Mekhilta (on Exodus 21:14, Mishpatim, ed. Horovitz, p. 263) that if a Jew kills a non-Jew, his judgment is in the hands of Heaven, and therefore a Kohen who killed a non-Jew may not raise his hands. Rabbi Eilenburg concluded: “This seems correct in theory, but not in practice.” However, Rabbi Uziel apparently ruled this way in practice based on the Mekhilta.

Furthermore, as we have proved elsewhere in detail (Golinkin, 2014), it is forbidden to kill a non-Jew. Therefore, in my opinion, a Kohen who killed a non-Jew in battle has still taken “a soul”, and this is not the reason to permit him to raise his hands in the Priestly Blessing.

2. We have already seen that the Tosafists stated in two places that the opinion in Berakhot is “merely a stringency.” Rabbi Shemariah Menashe Adler relied on them and argued that since Rabbi Yohanan’s teaching in Berakhot is a merely a rabbinic stringency, it is enough for us to say that he was referring to a Kohen who killed a soul in general, but not in war. (Cf. Rabbi Yehuda Leizner, who in his question to Rabbi Litvin also emphasized on the basis of Tosafot that this prohibition is merely a stringency.)
3. If the Kohen repented, he is permitted to raise his hands. This is the general approach of the Rema mentioned above and of the many poskim who ruled accordingly, and so ruled Rabbi Zvi Hirsch Shapira regarding a soldier who is a Kohen: if he repented, he may raise his hands. For various approaches as to how to repent, please see my responsum on the subject (Golinkin, 2021).
4. We have already seen that Rabbi Hezekiah de Silva ruled that someone who was coerced is permitted to raise his hands. Rabbi Shemariah Menashe Adler and Rabbi Moshe Feinstein wrote that since the soldier was drafted into the army, this constitutes coercion, and therefore he may raise his hands.

However, two major halakhic authorities understood coercion differently. Rabbi Shimon Sofer wrote: “The soldiers were all coerced to shoot at their enemies… and since [the Kohen] was coerced, he is included in [giving] the blessing.” And so wrote Rabbi Ovadia Yosef: “If so, the Kohen who stands before enemy armies and is exposed to danger, there is no greater coercion than this. ‘If someone comes to kill you, rise early to kill him first’ (Berakhot 62b).” In other words, the coercion is not the draft, but rather the soldier’s need to defend himself from the enemy — just as in your case.

5. However, in my opinion, there is a primary reason to rule that a Kohen who killed terrorists in Gaza is permitted to raise his hands in the priestly blessing. This reason is based on the above-mentioned responsum of Rabbi Shimshon of Sens written some 800 years ago. He ruled that a Kohen who circumcised a baby and the baby died may still raise his hands—because the mohel had the intent to fulfill a mitzvah.

This means that if serving in the army is a mitzvah, then a Kohen who killed terrorists in battle is still permitted to raise his hands. Indeed, I have demonstrated elsewhere (Golinkin, 2024) at length that an 18-year-old Jewish boy is obligated and commanded to serve in the IDF — because of milhemet mitzvah (a commanded war), pikuah nefesh (saving lives), dina de’malkhuta dina (the law of the land is the law), love your neighbor as yourself, Kiddush Hashem (sanctifying God’s name), and other reasons. Therefore, if a Kohen is obligated and commanded to serve in the army for all these reasons, how can one possibly suggest that if, during his service, he was forced to kill terrorists, he is forbidden to raise his hands in blessing?!

Indeed, this was emphasized by six prominent modern halakhic authorities in relation to various wars:

1. Rabbi Shemariah Menashe Adler ruled regarding the tens of thousands of Jewish soldiers who fought in World War I. He wanted to defend the ruling of Rabbi Joseph Hertz, Chief Rabbi of England, who ruled in 1914 that Kohanim are obligated to serve in the Allied forces. Rabbi Adler based his ruling on biblical precedents as interpreted by the Midrashic teachings of the Sages: Pinhass became a Kohen after killing Zimri ben Salu (Zevahim 101b). Moses served as High Priest (Zevahim, ibid.), even though he had killed the Egyptian in Exodus chapter 1. Elijah the Prophet was a Kohen (Bava Metzia 114a–b), and yet he killed the prophets of Baal (I Kings 18:40). “From all this it is clear that where a person kills in a context of a mitzvah and Divine command, he is not disqualified by it. On the contrary, it’s a positive thing, he is sanctified by it even more.”
2. Rabbi Mordechai Winkler offered a similar ruling regarding Kohanim who fought in Galicia before 1922 (presumably referring to World War I). He stated that this involves pikuah nefesh (saving lives). And if one is trying to rescue Jews and non-Jews from captivity, this is “a milhemet mitzvah (a commanded war), and therefore, the Kohen is not guilty of shedding blood. And what of the Hasmoneans, who were Kohanim and waged victorious war against the Greek empire, and miracles and wonders were performed for them by our Father in Heaven — who would dare say that they shed blood and are disqualified from raising their hands?! Heaven forbid, even to mention such a thing!”
3. And so ruled Rabbi Hillel Posek regarding Kohanim fighting against the Nazis in World War II. He ruled that this war was a fulfillment of the mitzvah to obliterate Amalek (Exodus 17:14; Deuteronomy 25:19). He also relied on the precedents mentioned above: Pinhass, Moses (Zevahim, cit.), and the Hasmoneans who were Kohanim and fought against the Greeks. He concluded: “And all the Kohanim who will merit to return safely from the front are holy and pure [to perform] all sacred duties.”
4. And so ruled Rabbi Uziel, apparently around the time of Israel’s War of Independence, in a halakhic ruling cited by Rabbi Felder (p. 52): “He concluded that Kohanim are obligated to enlist, and that it’s a mitzvah for them to stand in the battlefield and to defend our remnants and the honor of our land. He is doing nothing but fulfilling the command of God, and thus he remains in his complete priestly status like all the sons of Aaron — to raise his hands and bless the people of God.”
5. And so ruled Rabbi Ovadia Yosef (p. 61) regarding IDF soldiers:

   All the more so here, where Kohanim who are IDF soldiers stand to defend Israel and our Holy Land — there is no doubt that they are performing a great mitzvah by confronting enemy armies that come to sow destruction and to kill, destroy and annihilate men, women, and children. This is what Maimonides ruled in Chapter 5 of Hilkhot Melakhim [as I too cited in my responsum mentioned above – DG] — that defending Israel from enemy attack is considered a milhemet mitzvah [a commanded war]. Therefore, there is absolutely no doubt that these Kohanim are fit to perform the priestly blessing… It is appropriate to say to them: ‘May your hands be strengthened, and may your strength be blessed.’ ”

I agree with every word, and it is chilling to read Rabbi Ovadia Yosef’s words from 1978, which describe exactly what Hamas yimah shemam did on October 7, 2023.

6. And so ruled Rabbi Eliezer Melamed in our time (Likutim, vol. 1, p. 282):

This [disqualification from reciting the priestly blessing] applies only if the killing was not in accord with Jewish law. But a Kohen who killed Israel’s enemies in war is fit to perform the priestly blessing — just like Pinhass ben Elazar and the Hasmoneans, who fought Israel’s enemies and thereby expressed their Priesthood.

Therefore, there is no reason for concern. According to all the halakhic authorities mentioned above, you are permitted to raise your hands in the priestly blessing, especially since everything you did was in fulfillment of the mitzvah of serving in the IDF.

David Golinkin
Jerusalem
27 Tishrei 5786

Notes

1. In the four manuscripts of tractate Berakhot, and among early authorities, there are variant readings: “אמר ר’” (without a name); “אמר ר’ אלעזר”; “אמר ר’ אלעזר אמר ר’ חנינא.”
   See the Lieberman-institute.com for textual variants of Berakhot 32b, as well as R.N.N. Rabinowitz, Dikdukei Soferim on Berakhot, Munich, 1868, p. 171, note פ. In this responsum, we will use the name “Rabbi Yohanan,” since all modern halakhic authorities used that name on the basis of the printed editions of the Talmud.
2. The two words in square brackets follow the editions of Shabtai Frankel and Rambam La’am, based on the Venice and Mantua printings and Yemenite manuscripts. This is also the version cited by Rabbeinu Manoah in his commentary to the Rambam, ad loc.
3. The Ra’avyah was only printed in the 20^th-21st centuries, but his opinion on this topic is cited by many early authorities; see, in chronological order: Or Zarua, vol. 2, paragraph 412, ed. Zhitomir, 1862, folio 83d = ed. Mekhon Yerushalayim, 2010, vol. 2, p. 470; Y.Z. Kahana, Rabbi Meir ben Baruch of Rothenburg: Teshuvot, Pesakim Uminhagim, 1, Jerusalem, 1957, No. 41; Hagahot Maimoniyot on the Rambam ad loc., note א; Mordechai on Megillah, paragraph 818, ed. Vilna, fol. 18c; Sefer Ha’agudah on Megillah, paragraph 34, ed. Brizel, Jerusalem, 1966, p. 104. Rabbi Menahem Recanati, ed. Jerusalem, 1978, paragraph 39, quotes Or Zarua but attributes the entire passage to the Ra’aviyah.

It is worth noting that in paragraph 151 (ed. Aptowitzer, vol. 1, pp. 154–155; ed. Mekhon Harry Fischel, Jerusalem, 2023, vol. 1, pp. 211–212; ed. Doblitsky, vol. 1, p. 118), the Ra’aviyah offers two other solutions to the contradiction between the Yerushalmi and the Bavli – see ibid.

4. I am quoting from Responsa Maharam of Rothenburg (Ashkenaz, d. 1293), ed. Prague–Budapest, paragraph 1. Cf. the references in note 1, ; Hagahot Maimoniyot cited above; Mordechai cited above; Rabbeinu Yeruham, Netiv 3, part 6, ed. Venice, 1553, folios 27c–d = ed. Yair Chazan, vol. 1, Jerusalem, 2019, p. 95; Nimukei Harav Menahem Meersburg (Ashkenaz, ca. 1325) at the end of Responsa Rabbi Yaakov Weil, ed. Jerusalem, 1988, p. 178.

Bibliography

 I. Responsa until the 16^th Century

Ibn Haviv – הרב לוי אבן חביב, שו”ת מהרלב”ח, לעמבערג, תרכ”ה, סימן קי”ז
Ibn Zimra — הרב דוד אבן זמרא, שו”ת רדב”ז, ניו יורק, תשכ”ז, חלק ד’, סימן אלף קצ”ח (קכ”ח)
Maharam of Rothenburg — שו”ת מהר”ם בן ברוך, דפוס פראג-בודאפעשט, תרנ”ה, סימן א’
Maharam of Rothenburg — תשובות פסקים ומנהגים, מהד’ יצחק זאב כהנא, חלק א’, ירושלים, תשי”ז, סימן מ”א
Rav Hai Gaon — תשובה של רב האי גאון אל כהנים באפריקי, אוצר הגאונים למסכת קידושין, ירושלים, ת”ש, חלק התשובות, סימן תי”ט, עמ’ 189

II. Responsa of the 20^th-21^st Centuries

Adler – הרב שמריה מנשה אדלר, מראה כהן, סימן קמ”ז-ק”נ
Feinstein — הרב משה פיינשטיין, אגרות משה, יורה דעה, חלק ב’, ניו יורק, תשל”ג,  סימן קנ”ח בסוף
Felder — הרב גדליה פלדר, יסודי ישרון, חלק ב, ניו יורק, תשט״ז, עמ׳ נ’-נ”ד
Fried — הרב נתנאל הכהן פריד, פני מבין, חלק א’, מונקאטש, תרע”ג, השמטות, סימן רל”ט
Golinkin, 2014 – David Golinkin, “What does Halakhah say about the murder of Muhammad Abu Khdeir and other attacks against innocent Arabs”, Responsa in a Moment, Vol. III, Jerusalem, 2014, No. 17; also at schechter.edu
Golinkin, 2021 – David Golinkin, “How should a person repent for causing an accidental death?”, Responsa in a Moment, Vol. V, Jerusalem, 2017, No. 10; also at schechter.edu
Golinkin, 2024 – David Golinkin, “Does Jewish law require yeshivah students to be drafted at age 18?”, Responsa in a Moment, Vol. VI, Jerusalem, 2024, No. 3; also at schechter.edu
Leiter — הרב זאב וואלף לייטער, בית דוד, חלק ב’, ווין, תרצ”ב, סימן ע”א
Litwin — הרב חיים יהודא לייב ליטוין, שערי דעה, לעמבערג, תרל”ח (כהן שהרג יהודי אחר שתקף אותו בכלי ברזל, תוך כדי הגנה עצמית)
Melamed — הרב אליעזר מלמד, פניני הלכה: תפילה, מהדורה חמישית, הר ברכה, תשע”ח, עמ’ 310-309; שם, ליקוטים א’, הר ברכה, תש”פ, עמ’ 282
Posek — הרב הלל פוסק, הלל אומר, תל אביב, תשט”ז, סימן ס”א
Rivlin — הרב יצחק ריבלין, ספר תורת המחנה, חלק א’ (חסרים מקום ושנת ההדפסה), סיכום בעמ׳ ט”ו, סעיף כ”ג; ותשובה, שם, י”ג:כ”ג, עמ׳ 138-137 (על חייל שהרג חייל אחר בשוגג במהלך תרגיל)
Schwadron — הרב שלום מרדכי שבדרון, מהרש”ם, חלק ה’, סייני, תרפ”ו, סימן ל’ (כהן שזרק מנורה על חבירו ונפטר החבר לאחר שמונה ימים)
Schwartz — הרב יוסף שווארץ, ויצבור יוסף, גראסווארדיין, תרצ”ו, סימן ל”ו (טרם ראיתי את התשובה הזאת)
Shapira — הרב צבי הירש שפירא, צבי תפארת, מונקאטש, תרע”ב, סימן ל”ז
Sofer – הרב יעקב חיים סופר, כף החיים לאורח חיים קכ”ח:ל”ה-ל”ו
Sofer — הרב שמעון סופר, התעוררות תשובה, חלק ד’, בודאפעסט, תרצ”ד, סימן י”א
Tchorsh — הרב כתריאל פישל טכורש, כתר אפרים, תל אביב, תשכ”ז, סימן ל”ג
Uziel — הרב בן ציון מאיר חי עוזיאל, משפטי עוזיאל, מהדורה תניינא, חלק א, ירושלים, תש”ז, סימן י;  והשוו הרב פלדר, עמ’ נ”ב, לפסק נוסף של הרב עוזיאל בנדון
Waldenberg — הרב אליעזר ולדינברג, ציץ אליעזר, חלק י”ד, ירושלים, תשמ”א, סימן ס’
Winkler — הרב מרדכי יהודה ליב וינקלער, לבושי מרדכי, אורח חיים, מהדורה תניינא, בודאפעשט, תרפ”ב, סוף סימן י”ז
Wosner — הרב שמואל הלוי וואזנער, שבט הלוי, חלק א’, בני ברק, תש”ל, סימן מ”ג (על כהן שפגע ברכבו באיש זקן והלה נפטר לאחר שלושים יום)
Yosef — הרב עובדיה יוסף, יחוה דעת, חלק ב’, ירושלים, תשל”ח, סימן י”ד. (והשוו שם, חלק ה’, סימן ט”ז, על כהן שהרג את הנפש בתאונת דרכים)
Yosef — הרב יצחק יוסף, ילקוט יוסף, שארית יוסף, חלק ג’, ירושלים, תשנ”ו, עמ׳ ר”ד. (סיכום של דברי אביו ביחוה דעת, חלק ב’)

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

(image: IDF Soldier Using a Thermal Scope in Gaza, 2024, IDF Spokesman Unit, via wikicommons CC BY-SA 3.0)