SIMILARITIES TO NEOPLATONISM AND ENCOUNTERING THE ONENESS OF BEING THROUGH FACING DEATH OF INDIVIDUAL EGO

Janicaud puts the character of auto-affection in The Essence of Manifestation thus:

its [thinking’s] first condition is a receptivity every going-beyond toward a horizon supposes. “Immanence is the original mode according to which is accomplished the revelation of transcendence itself and hence the original essence of revelation.” Henry integrates the Husserlian epoché and the Heideggerian ontological difference into what he claims to be a more fundamental return to the things themselves, that of manifestation as revelation. The rest of the work will explain this as autoaffection: the essence of manifestation reveals itself in affectivity, not that of an individual subject, derisively subjective, but of revelation itself, absolute in its inner experience.[91]

also from the site linked to above:

Narbonne concludes his book with a comparison between the verticality of the Neoplatonic metaphysics and the Seyn of the Ereignis as immediate horizontal ground:



Despite a certain communality in the will to pass beyond objectification…we have ascertained that Neoplatonism is set out along an axis opposed to that of which Heidegger has an inkling. The Neoplatonic way is erected vertically; it is ordered upward along a mediation notably by way of soul and intellect.…The Heideggerian horizontal approach is totally different.…In place of the steps of reality he substitutes a pure process which begins from an event (the Seyn as Ereignis), with which no mediated connection is permitted…To the Neoplatonic theme of the “beyond” (epékeina), it seems to me that he opposes the theme of the “on the contrary side,” that is to say of that which happens without mediation, if not in opposition, at least as something done behind its back, and as a kind of crossing-over from everything else.[95]