If conceived in onto-theological terms - according to which God is the highest being (summum ens) -, the distinction between "transcendence" and "immanence" may lead to the problem of the presence of the divine within immanence. God, in fact, would "be" in transcendence - and from the creaturely standpoint one should then attempt to understand whether, and to what extent, the divine also permeates that which is not pure transcendence. Trinitarian ontology, for example, makes it possible to resolve this problem through the dialectic that unfolds among the divine Persons; this would also allow for the inclusion of the negative within the divine essence (as, for instance, the abyss [Gottheit] of the Father in Meister Eckhart's thought). If, however, one assumes that the divine "essences" [west] itself beyond the limits of ontotheology, the framework of the problem changes. The focus no longer lies in identifying the domain in which God properly "is", is actualized (or is not); nor does it lie in reabsorbing the negative into a monolithic essence of the divine, inscribing it within a dialectic that nonetheless ultimately rests in the presence of God. This paper aims to investigate the consequences of a non-ontotheological approach on the level of the difference. The difference between Creator and creature should still be maintained, but it would no longer rest on the opposition between presence and absence; nor would one primarily seek to locate the presence of the divine within the creature (for example, the Eckhartian Grund der Seele - although in that case it coincided precisely with nothingness, contrary to a naïve ontotheological approach) in order to elevate the latter. The paper will in turn examine how, in this context, the modes of relating to the divine - analogical on the one hand, apophatic on the other - are redefined, with their legitimacy assessed.