ehends the difference between the two [sorts of experiences] that the apprehension of waking experience is false [as to its externality] just because it is an apprehension resembling that in a dream" (Ram-Prasad, American, 11). Sankara argues against the point of externality. He points out that one who cannot establish the absence of objectual support of waking experiences should not try to establish such an absence of support to the same extent with dreaming experiences. Sankara's point can be best said by a waking experiences features various qualities of objects and their appearance of externality which is an undeniable fact in the nature of experience. Dreaming experience features the same qualities and the appearance of externality but when dreaming there is no actual externality. By using Sankara's point it shows that the idealist can no longer prove the cognition of externality in waking experiences nor in dreams. Although dreaming and the concept of dreams have been included in the psychological teachings these points have made it to be a philosophical one too. Both Vasubandhu and Sankara have valid points. The concept of externality was used in both arguements-Sankara for the idea and Vasbandhu against it. If Vasubandhu was correct then we should be aware at all times that our experiences are an illusion. Sankara an anti-idealist states that " they too, in the manner known to all people, become aware of the appearance of externality and only because of that are able to use the qualifier 'as if ' in the term as if external; yet they deny externality" (Ram-Prasad, American, 35). This quote sums the points up the best in displaying the concepts of both philosophers and the ideas that they had. A dream is something that we will never fully understand because it is mysterious in itself. For now we will go with the basis that there is a difference between waking and dreaming and that we are fully aware of it....
