1QS 7:2
Community Rule2 If he has failed to care for his companion, he shall do penance fo three months. But if he has failed to care for the property of the Community, thereby causing its loss, he shall restore it in full. And if he be unable to restore it, he shall do penance for sixty days. Whoever has borne malice against his companion unjustly shall do penance for six months/one year; and likewise, whoever has take revenge in any matter whatever. 3 Whoever has spoken foolishly: three months; Whoever has interrupted his companion whilst speaking: ten days; Whoever has lain down to sleep during an Assembly of the Congregation: thirty days. And likewise, whoever has left, without reason, an Assembly of the Congregation as many as three time during one Assembly, shall do penance for ten days. But if he has departed whilst they were standing he shall do penance for thirty days. Whoever has gone naked before his companion, without having been obliged to do so, he shall do penance for six months. Whoever has spat in an Assembly of the Congregation shall do penance for thirty days.
Matthew 5:22
21 “You have heard that it was said to an older generation, ‘Do not murder,’ and ‘whoever murders will be subjected to judgment.’ 22 But I say to you that anyone who is angry with a brother will be subjected to judgment. And whoever insults a brother will be brought before the council, and whoever says ‘Fool’ will be sent to fiery hell. 23 So then, if you bring your gift to the altar and there you remember that your brother has something against you, 24 leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother and then come and present your gift. 25 Reach agreement quickly with your accuser while on the way to court, or he may hand you over to the judge, and the judge hand you over to the warden, and you will be thrown into prison. 26 I tell you the truth, you will never get out of there until you have paid the last penny!
Notes and References
"... Is it possible that Jesus was simply being hyperbolic? Perhaps, but if that is the case, then it is odd that he would invoke an actual law that was tried in Jewish courts in verse 21. Such an interpretation leaves us in the difficult position of understanding that "liability to judgment" in verse 22 means something entirely different than it means in verse 21. Keener, similar to Derrett, has argued that Matthew 5:22 refers to the heavenly court, rather than 'the Sanhedrin,' that is, the Jerusalem governing body. His argument, too, is mostly based on very late rabbinic evidence, which speaks of a heavenly Sanhedrin. It is also important to note that verses 23-26 quite clearly depicts a human court. If verse 22 does not, then it is odd that it is surrounded by verses that do envision a human justice system. Moreover, Keener's argument leaves aside altogether the possibility that neither a heavenly court nor the Jewish governing body known as 'the Sanhedrin' are in view in this passage, but rather, a local synagogue council. I suggest that this third option is preferable, and best reflects the historical setting of Jesus's rural Galilee, where trials were held in synagogue settings. How could an earthly court be expected to judge anger? This problem has not gone unnoticed by interpreters. Some scholars have, however, noted some potential parallels in the sectarian documents at Qumran. 1QS 6:24-27, 7:1-5 contains [parallel] rules and penalties ..."
Ryan, Jordan J. The Role of the Synagogue in the Aims of Jesus (pp. 157-159) Fortress Press, 2017