At the beginning of Part II of the Ethics, Spinoza remarks that the vulgus has a tendency to ‘compare’ or ‘confuse’ two powers of different natures, that of God and that of kings. This scholium marks a halting point, a pause, for both a recapitulation and a foreword, where Spinoza's impatience shows through. The progression is remarkable:

Spinoza draws the reader's attention to three points: 1. The object of the whole second half of Part I of the Ethics, which the reader would have just read, was to distinguish between the two powers. 2. This distinction is not simple. 3. It is a waste of time to bother reading the rest if one has not incorporated its lesson. Sometimes Spinoza tells us to continue to read even if we feel like we have not followed the argument, or that we are not in agree-ment. But here the alternative is clear: either you have understood, or else there is nothing to do but close the book. There is no ethics, in short, if you have not understood that God is not a king. Consequently, you must soak up this second half: read it iterum atque iterum … atque iterum, again and again or more! The distinction between the two powers is key to accessing the ethics.

We must recognise that Spinoza has some reason for being impatient: even leaving aside the appendix, this is the fourth time since the start of the Ethics that he affirms this distinction between divine power and human power.