The contemptuous hatred of Ben Sira, Ecclesiasticus 1.26, and the author of Jubilees xxiv.
The apology for the necessary defects of a translation put forward by the translator of Ecclesiasticus in his Prologue shows that the work was carried on beyond the limits of the Law.
B, Ecclesiasticus comes between Wisdom and Esther, no distinction being drawn between canonical and uncanonical.
By about the beginning of our era the Jews had given up Hebrew and wrote in Aramaic; the process of expulsion had been going on, doubtless, for some time; but comparison with the later extant literature (Chronicles, the Hebrew Ecclesiasticus or Ben-Sira, Esther) makes it improbable that such Hebrew as that of Koheleth would have been written earlier than the 2nd century B.C. (for details see Driver's Introduction).
How late the Chronicler wrote cannot perhaps be determined; but it is, at all events, impossible to prove that the author of Ecclesiasticus was acquainted with his work.
He became involved in a controversy with Joseph Justus Scaliger, formerly his intimate friend, and others, wrote Ecclesiasticus auctoritati Jacobi regis oppositus (1611), an attack upon James I.
The Hebrew text of Ecclesiasticus xlix.
The difference in conception of the term is similar to that between Ecclesiasticus and the Wisdom of Solomon.
In the Jewish Church Ecclesiasticus hovered on the border of the canon; in the Christian Church it crossed and recrossed the border.
In this regard Ecclesiasticus agrees with Proverbs - it has no word of advice for women.