text:
How is re-linking consciousness reconciled with MN 38?
In the essay "Buddhist Reflections on Death", V.F. Gunaratna wrote:

The terminal thought goes through the same stages of progress as any
  other thought, with this differences that whereas the apperceptive
  stage of complete cognition known as javana or impulsion, which in the
  case of any other thought occupies seven thought-moments. At this
  apperceptive stage the dying person fully comprehends the death-sign.
  Then follows the stage of registering consciousness (tadalambana)
  when the death-sign is identified. This consciousness arises for two
  thought-moments and passes away. After this comes the stage of death
  consciousness (cuti-citta). Then occurs death. This is what happens
  in this existence.
Now let us consider what happens in the next existence. Already the
  preliminaries for the arrival of a new being are in preparation. There
  is the male parent and there is the female parent. As explained
  previously a third factor, a psychic factor, is necessary to complete
  the preliminaries for the arising of a live embryo, and that is the
  relinking consciousness (patisandi-viññana) which arises in the next
  existence in the appropriate setting — the mother's womb. On the
  conjunction of these three factors, life starts in the mother's womb.
  There is no lapse of time, no stoppage of the unending stream of
  consciousness.

As I understand, the last consciousness of a lifetime (cuti-citta) and re-linking consciousness (patisandhi-viññana) are terms coming from the Abhidhamma. They explain the continuity of the stream of consciousness from one lifetime to the next. This together with bhavanga and javana (see here) explains the continuity of the stream of consciousness between thought-moments both in this lifetime and the next lifetime, and between the two.
On the other hand, MN 38 seems to imply that there is no continuity of consciousness and that consciousness arises conditionally based on dependent origination.

The Blessed One then asked him: “Sāti, is it true that the following
  pernicious view has arisen in you: ‘As I understand the Dhamma taught
  by the Blessed One, it is this same consciousness that runs and
  wanders through the round of rebirths, not another’?”
“Exactly so, venerable sir. As I understand the Dhamma taught by the
  Blessed One, it is this same consciousness that runs and wanders
  through the round of rebirths, not another.”
“What is that consciousness, Sāti?”
“Venerable sir, it is that which speaks and feels and experiences here
  and there the result of good and bad actions.”
“Misguided man, to whom have you ever known me to teach the Dhamma in
  that way? Misguided man, have I not stated in many ways consciousness
  to be dependently arisen, since without a condition there is no
  origination of consciousness? But you, misguided man, have
  misrepresented us by your wrong grasp and injured yourself and stored
  up much demerit; for this will lead to your harm and suffering for a
  long time.”

So, how does the Abhidhamma reconcile the concept of re-linking consciousness (patisandhi-viññana) with MN 38 above?
Also, even in the current lifetime, is there any real continuity of consciousness or does it merely appear so?

There is no conflict between MN 38 and Abhidhamma. Stream of consciousness OR Continuity of consciousness means individual consciousness which arises (uppada), exists (titi), ceases (bhanga) rapidly as an effect of many causes. It's just a stream, not an eternal single one. Think of a stream of water. When you look at a single point in the stream, you see many water droplets appear, exist, and disappear. If you consider the past, present, and future of that droplet, you'll see a stream. In reality, it's not the same droplet nor another droplet you see in the past, present, and future.

@Damith You can write this as an answer.

There is no contradiction between MN 38 and Abhidhamma.
Stream of consciousness OR Continuity of consciousness means individual consciousness which arises (uppada), exists (titi), ceases (bhanga) rapidly as an effect of many causes. It's just a stream, not a long lasting single one.
Think of a stream of water. When you look at a single point in the stream, you see many water droplets appear, exist, and disappear. Take a single droplet out of it which passed by(*) that point. If you consider the past, present, and future of that droplet, you'll see a stream. In reality, it's not the same droplet nor another droplet you see in the past, present, and future. Stream of consciousness is analogous to this example. Please try to understand it in that way.

The Dhamma is not a speculative philosophy, but is the Universal Law found through enlightenment and is preached precisely. Therefore it is Excellent in the beginning (Sila — Moral principles), Excellent in the middle (Samadhi — Concentration) and Excellent in the end (Panna — Wisdom).

~ Cited from: Six qualities of Dhamma
This is the Svakkhata quality of Dhamma. If we find contradiction somewhere in Dhamma, it's not because contradiction lies within Dhamma but may be because we don't really understand what's actually described or may be the lack of words in translating original pali canon to other languages which eventually leads to misconception.
(*) Note: "passed by" - This phrasal verb can be only used when we talk in conventional truth. The reader may think that rūpa (form/matter) can move in space which is not a true in ultimate reality. Neither any nāma (name) nor rūpa can move. What happens is the arose rūpa existed and ceased then and there. After that new rūpa arise nearby. This is called "Deshāntarotpatti".

Thanks. So MN 38 is a rejection of consciousness as being the eternal unchanging self that moves from life to life. It's not a rejection of the continuity of the stream of consciousness that is conditioned and changing.

Yes, true. The idea of eternal unchanging self in any dhamma (either in nāma or rūpa) is rejected in Buddhism. If someone is trying to find such dhamma he/she will be tired of finding nothing.

Hmmm dammit, you're good!

Thank you @AndreiVolkov sir! Actually it's not me sir, it's the beauty of this Dhamma. I'm just a speaker of that Dhamma...

Once again, a very good answer!

So, how does the Abhidhamma reconcile the concept of re-linking consciousness (patisandhi-viññana) with MN 38 above?

It doesn't have to because Abh. and MN 38 talked about different consciousnesses. "Consciousness" is a very broad term and require specific context for a specific meaning. And this is why the Buddha specifically asked Ven. Sati: "What is that consciousness?" in which he replied: "Venerable sir, it is that which speaks and feels and experiences here and there the result of good and bad actions.”, ie. the senses consciousness (one that which is experienced in conjunction with the six sense media). It'd be interesting had Ven. Sati mentioned the rebirth-linking consciousness or the consciousness without feature (Viññanam anidassanam, DN11, MN49). Kinda similar to the situation with modern science where the kind of "matter" as we know only takes up 4.6% of what's out there in the universe, while the remaining 95.4% are composed of "dark matter", 23%; and dark energy, 72%. And they're dark not because they're "dark", but because we still have no clue of what they are. Another point worth noticing in MN 38 was that the Buddha didn't have issue with the "continuity" of consciousness, instead He had an issue with the "sameness" of consciousness. Hence the question He asked Ven. Sati: "Sāti, is it true that the following pernicious view has arisen in you: ‘As I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, it is this same consciousness that runs and wanders through the round of rebirths, not another’?”.

MN 38 of Sāti-bhikkhu is about the single consciousness traveling, viññāna-sakkāya-diṭṭhi. It never arises or vanishes, independent form the origination, and can control itself through the new body/life.
But Paṭisandhi of Abhidhamma is about many various aggregates conditioning each other by many methods.

For the example, a human rebirth has 33 mental factors+1 consciousnesses+30 matters are conascence depending on each other. They all depending on their past karmma mental factor, which depending on its 33 conascence mental factors+1 consciousness+many matters (rebirth from matter-realm). All those consciousnesses, mental factors, and matters also are depending on their uncountable previous arisen consciousnesses, mental factors, and matters. This is just a brief example. There is millions more explanation in 12 briefed
  abhidhamma-piṭaka-canons. It still is only little Leaves in Buddha's hand

By the above example, you can see Paṭisandhi, it's conditioners, and it's conditioned things are depending on many other conditioners. They all are not independent, cannot control itself, so it is completely different from MN 38.
The main idea of Vipassanā Meditation is the practitioner can realize impermanent, suffering, and non-self more and more when the practitioner analyzes aggregates' conditioners more and more in detail.
Paṭisandhi, the re-linking, is a term of bh.Sāriputta, the great follower, it often appears in every bh.Sāriputta's canon because he is the representative of the Buddha at Buddha-living-time in AN Ekakanipāta Ekapuggalavagga, so it is his job to explain Buddha's teaching. It appeared in MN Mahāgosiṅgasālasutta that most of the foremost Buddha's followers go listen to Sāriputta's sermon.
Buddha uses many various other words which mean "rebirth" instead of bh. Sāriputta's "Paṭisandhi". See my answer in this question, and notice the words using of quoted sutta in that answer, it is using in the next.
Bh.Sāriputta defined "Paṭisandhi" from DN 15 Mahāvagga Mahānidānasutta:

Name-&-Form
“‘From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form.’ Thus it has been said. And this is the way to understand how from consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. If consciousness were not to descend into the mother’s womb, would name-&-form take shape in the womb?”
“No, lord.”
“If, after descending into the womb, consciousness were to depart, would name-&-form be produced for this world?”
“No, lord.”
“If the consciousness of the young boy or girl were to be cut off, would name-&-form ripen, grow, and reach maturity?”
“No, lord.”
“Thus this is a cause, this is a reason, this is an origination, this is a requisite condition for name-&-form, i.e., consciousness.
Consciousness
“From name-&-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness.’ Thus it has been said. And this is the way to understand how from name-&-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness. If consciousness were not to gain a foothold in name-&-form, would a coming-into-play of the origination of birth, aging, death, and stress in the future be discerned?”
“No, lord.”
“Thus this is a cause, this is a reason, this is an origination, this is a requisite condition for consciousness, i.e., name-&-form.
“This is the extent to which there is birth, aging, death, passing away, and re-arising. This is the extent to which there are means of designation, expression, and delineation. This is the extent to which the dimension of discernment extends, the extent to which the cycle revolves for the manifesting [discernibility] of this world—i.e., name-&-form together with consciousness.

Buddha didn't answer the ten questions of bh. Māluṅkya in MN CūḷaMāluṅkyOvādasuttaṃ because bh. Māluṅkya, young, was caving four gains at that time. The story appears in MN MahāMāluṅkyOvādasuttaṃ, AN Māluṅkayaputtasuttaṃ when bh.Maluṅkaya got old, KN Thera. MaluṅkayaputtaTheraGathā after old bh.Māluṅkaya enlightened, and you can see in their Atthakathā as well.
However actually, Buddha already answered it in DN1 Brahmajālasuttaṃ, and Buddha described the dependent origination part of DN1 in DN 15 Mahāvagga Mahānidānasutta quoted above.
Even Tipitaka and Atthakathā are written on papers as the public domain license, they still recite&memorize orally in Mahāvihāra Theravāda Buddhist Line, such as Pa-Auk. We never deny people to comment on Tipitaka and Atthakathā, but it's Mahāvihāra Tipiṭaka Memorizer Right to adjust the tipiṭaka users' misunderstood because we have lesser of the lacking in reading because through 2600 years we still recite&memorize Tipitaka and Atthakathā, not just read through.
The similitude is the chemist who has recited, memorized, and learned about the periodic table and the formulas from the past chemist generation to generation.
If one still want to see their past life, your welcome to Pa-Auk monastery. Here you can practice to recalling your past life as long as you can, but you must meditate Jhāna before the recalling step.
Actually, abhidhammic people not often talk about the rebirth too much in our daily life because we already have known of the rebirth in detail. People Fear What They Don't Understand, so abhidhammic people have no fear in rebirth either there is the real rebirth or not. We don't debate people to protect "rebirth theory" and "no rebirth theory" because we are not eternalist and nihilism. We just explain people's misunderstood of "rebirth" in tipitaka-pali to keep Tipitaka goes on till 5000 years because the "no rebirth theory" supporters are trying to cut many sutta off Tipiṭaka. This is dangerous equal to the "rebirth theory" supporters try to add the new sutta into Tipiṭaka.
Are the "no rebirth theory" supporters are fearing of the rebirth? Why they often talk about the rebirth without the understood of it in detail? Is that ignorant of the rebirth information leading them to be fear of the rebirth? Is it the main cause that they try to cut many sutta about heaven and hell off Tipiṭaka? Is it called doubt-fetter in SN12.20 Paccayasutta?

"When a disciple of the noble ones has seen well with right discernment this dependent co-arising & these dependently co-arisen phenomena as they have come to be, it is not possible that he would run after the past, thinking, 'Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past?' or that he would run after the future, thinking, 'Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall I be in the future?' or that he would be inwardly perplexed about the immediate present, thinking, 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it bound?' Such a thing is not possible. Why is that? Because the disciple of the noble ones has seen well with right discernment this dependent co-arising & these dependently co-arisen phenomena as they have come to be."

Related answer: https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/30708/10100


text:
What is the invisible consciousness or consciousness without surface?
From MN 49 (trans. Sujato):

Consciousness that is invisible, infinite, radiant all round—that’s
  what is not within the scope of experience based on earth, water,
  fire, air, creatures, gods, the Creator, Brahmā, the gods of streaming
  radiance, the gods replete with glory, the gods of abundant fruit, the
  Overlord, and the all.
Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ anantaṃ sabbato pabhaṃ ...

The invisible consciousness (viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ) from MN 49 seems to be different from the sense consciousness described in MN 18 e.g. eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness etc. because it is not within the scope of sense experience, according to MN 49. It is also found in DN 11. It is also translated as "consciousness without surface" (from here, trans. Thanissaro).
Question 1:
What is the invisible consciousness or consciousness without surface described in MN 49 and DN 11?
Is it a cosmic consciousness like the one found in Hinduism? I guess not.
Question 2:
This answer implies that this invisible consciousness or consciousness without surface is the re-linking consciousness (patisandhi-viññana) that connects one lifetime to the next. This also implies that the re-linking consciousness (patisandhi-viññana) which is the invisible consciousness or consciousness without surface (viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ) is the consciousness that descends into the womb causing materiality-mentality (nāmarūpa) to arise (from DN 15). Is this right?
Question 3:
Also, the description of "invisible, infinite and radiant all round" sounds very similar to the "luminous mind" (pabhassara citta) from AN 1.51-52. The same word "pabham" (luminosity) or "pabhassara" (luminous) is used in both MN 49 and AN 1.51-52. How is the invisible consciousness or consciousness without surface related to the luminous mind?

Closely related blog post by Bhikkhu Sujato: "Nibbana is not viññāṇa. Really, it just isn’t"

Related: Are there any detail exposition of Consciousness without surface (viññanam anidassanam)?

Related blog post: vinnanam anidassanam, thanissaro vs. orthodoxy

Pre-knowledge:
Jānāmi means I know.
Vijānāmi means I know various things.
Viññāṇa is noun from Vi prefix+Ñā root+Yu suffix.
Vijānāmi is verb from Vi prefix+Ñā root+Na suffix+Mi Case-endings.
Vijānāmi term is same as "I do Viññāṇa".
Viññāṇa = Vijāṅa = Cognition Of Various Object.
Recite and learn kaccayaṇa-vyākaraṇa from the Tipitaka Memorizer for more explanation, or see the answer of Damith and Andrei Volkov to understand more about this pre-knowledge.
Question 1

What is the invisible consciousness or consciousness without >surface described in MN 49 and DN 11?
Is it a cosmic consciousness like the one found in Hinduism? I guess not.

It definitely isn't cosmic consciousness. Actually, it is like to be known/knowledge in the other Sutta. However to understand it, the reader must recite and memorize Pali, first, then learn it with the inherited Tipitaka Memorizer, such as Pa-Auk because the proficiency is definitely required to understand the whole detail of each sutta. Even you can read Pali, Atthakathā, or ṭīkā, the proficiency still required.
See below explanation to understand why I tell you like that.
Your quoted MN 49 Brahmanimantanikasutta is bad cut, and wrong translation. It is:
Buddha said Brahma think "this is the all knowable thing in the universe", but actually  Brahma's knowledge is just a little compared to what could be known by Buddha's consciousness:

‘A galaxy extends a thousand times as far
‘Yāvatā candimasūriyā,

Buddha claims Buddha knows more than Brahma:

But there is another realm that you don’t know or see.
Atthi kho, brahme, añño kāyo, taṃ tvaṃ na jānāsi na passasi;
But I know it and see it.
tamahaṃ jānāmi passāmi.

Buddha claims Buddha knows Radiant Brahma:

the gods of streaming radiance …
ābhassare kho ahaṃ, brahme … pe …
the gods replete with glory (than above brahma) …
subhakiṇhe kho ahaṃ, brahme …

Buddha claims Buddha knows Nibbāna:

Having directly known earth as earth, and having directly known that which does not fall within the scope of experience based on earth, I did not identify with earth, I did not identify regarding earth, I did not identify as earth, I did not identify ‘earth is mine’, I did not enjoy earth.
Pathaviṃ kho ahaṃ, brahme, pathavito abhiññāya yāvatā pathaviyā pathavattena ananubhūtaṃ tadabhiññāya pathaviṃ nāpahosiṃ, pathaviyā nāpahosiṃ, pathavito nāpahosiṃ, pathaviṃ meti nāpahosiṃ, pathaviṃ nābhivadiṃ.

You can see that the contexts force to translate "viññāṇa" as "nibbāṇa".
2.1. Below quote, Brahma is asking for "the thing" which is not within the scope of experience based on all (no one has known before, including this brahma) but viññāṇa (consciousness)  is within the scope, so viññāṇa must is translated as adjective complement of "the thing (nibbāna) which is not within the scope of experience based on all" in above paragraph of it.
2.2. Brahma acts like he has the best cognition, so the Buddha shows him what he never know before, nibbāna which is potential to be known, invisible, infinite, radiant all round below.
2.3. You can see below translation has many words appearing in above quotes.
2.4. "Viññāṇaṃ, anidassanaṃ, anantaṃ sabbato pabhaṃ" all are adjective complements, but the previous translation is a noun, so I wrote above "the translation is wrong". Viññāṇaṃ in this context is potential to be known (adjective complement of the nibbāna noun), not consciousness (noun).
2.5. Buddha claims the best "potential to be known thing" is Nibbāna below quote.

‘Well, good sir, if you have directly known (the thing) which is not within the scope of experience based on all, may your words of (the thing) not turn out to be void and hollow! (Don't just say you know (the thing) because everybody can "say I know (the thing)" but they may don't really know anything! Describe it if it really is a true story!)
‘Sace kho, mārisa, sabbassa sabbattena ananubhūtaṃ, tadabhiññāya mā heva te rittakameva ahosi, tucchakameva ahosīti.
(The thing[=nibbāna]) that is potential to be known, invisible, infinite, radiant all round (nibbāna is invisible but similar to have radiant all round more than all Brahma-deva which appeared in many paragraphs above)—that’s what is not within the scope of experience based on earth, water, fire, air, creatures, gods, the Creator, Brahmā, the gods of streaming radiance, the gods replete with glory, the gods of abundant fruit, the Overlord, and the all.
Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ anantaṃ sabbato pabhaṃ, taṃ pathaviyā pathavattena ananubhūtaṃ, āpassa āpattena ananubhūtaṃ, tejassa tejattena ananubhūtaṃ, vāyassa vāyattena ananubhūtaṃ, bhūtānaṃ bhūtattena ananubhūtaṃ, devānaṃ devattena ananubhūtaṃ, pajāpatissa pajāpatittena ananubhūtaṃ, brahmānaṃ brahmattena ananubhūtaṃ, ābhassarānaṃ ābhassarattena ananubhūtaṃ, subhakiṇhānaṃ subhakiṇhattena ananubhūtaṃ, vehapphalānaṃ vehapphalattena ananubhūtaṃ, abhibhussa abhibhuttena ananubhūtaṃ, sabbassa sabbattena ananubhūtaṃ.

Abhidhamma and Atthakathā comment some same thing to me: Nibbāna is potential to be known and invisible. Visible thing has the end (paritta, little) but nibbāna is invisible (endless, ananta). "Radiant all round" is just the similitude that nibbāna is the best of the overall radiance.
The part of DN 11 Kevaṭṭasutta is the same case of above, MN 49 Brahmanimantanikasutta. It just added the rhetoric of "viññāṇa".
A bhikkhu try to know the cessation of the  Four Element, but  the great Brahma says he doesn't know but the Buddha knows it:

But I too do not know where these four primary elements cease with nothing left over.
Ahampi kho, bhikkhu, na jānāmi yatthime cattāro mahābhūtā aparisesā nirujjhanti, seyyathidaṃ—pathavīdhātu āpodhātu tejodhātu vāyodhātūti.

That bhikkhu's question is "where is Four Elements ceased?", so the answer should be the cessation state, Nirodha (nibbāna). Nibbāna is where the Four Elements ceased, where is potential to be known, and where is invisible.
So, it is the same case of above, MN 49, Buddha claims the best potential to be known thing is Nibbāna below quote.

This is how the question should be asked:
Evañca kho eso, bhikkhu, pañho pucchitabbo:

“Where do water and earth,
‘Kattha āpo ca pathavī,
fire and air find no footing;
tejo vāyo na gādhati;
where do long and short,
Kattha dīghañca rassañca,
fine and coarse, beautiful and ugly;
aṇuṃ thūlaṃ subhāsubhaṃ;
where do mentality and matterity
Kattha nāmañca rūpañca,
cease with nothing left over?”
asesaṃ uparujjhatī’ti.

And the answer to that is:
Tatra veyyākaraṇaṃ bhavati:

Where is potential to be known, invisible,
‘Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ,
infinite, radiant all round.
anantaṃ sabbatopabhaṃ;
Here’s where water and earth,
Ettha āpo ca pathavī,
fire and air find no footing;
tejo vāyo na gādhati.
here’s where long and short,
Ettha dīghañca rassañca,
fine and coarse, beautiful and ugly;
aṇuṃ thūlaṃ subhāsubhaṃ;

This is the additional more than DN 11, the rhetoric of "viññāṇa".
Because Buddha uses Viññāṇa as an adjective complement of nibbāna, above, but Buddha uses Viññāṇa again below quote from DN 11 as a noun, which is ceased by nibbāna in the cessation of dependent origination.

here’s where mentality and matterity
Ettha nāmañca rūpañca,
cease with nothing left over—
asesaṃ uparujjhati;
with the cessation (nirodha,nibbāna) of consciousness (viññāṇa),
Viññāṇassa nirodhena,
that’s where this ceases.”’”
etthetaṃ uparujjhatī’”ti.

It is important to understand MN 1 mūlapariyāyasuttaṃ with its commentary first before reading MN 49.

Question 2:

This answer implies that this invisible consciousness or consciousness without surface is the re-linking consciousness (patisandhi-viññana) that connects one lifetime to the next. This also implies that the re-linking consciousness (patisandhi-viññana) which is the invisible consciousness or consciousness without surface (viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ) is the consciousness that descends into the womb causing materiality-mentality (nāmarūpa) to arise (from DN 15). Is this right?

As I described DN 11 above, the first Viññāṇa is an adjective complement of nibbāna, but the second Viññāṇa is noun, which is ceased by nibbāna.
Therefore, the first Viññāṇa in DN 11 is Nibbāna, not re-linking consciousness. The second Viññāṇa is cresed re-linking consciousness by nirodha (nibbāna), not nibbāna.
Question 3:

Also, the description of "invisible, infinite and radiant all round" sounds very similar to the "luminous mind" (pabhassara citta) from AN 1.51-52. The same word "pabham" (luminosity) or "pabhassara" (luminous) is used in both MN 49 and AN 1.51-52. How is the invisible consciousness or consciousness without surface related to the luminous mind?

It definitely is different, just a bit of it refer to each other.
It is Nibbāna, not luminous mind. I already described in above MN 49:

(The thing[=nibbāna]) that is potential to be known, invisible, infinite, radiant all round (nibbāna is invisible but similar to have radiant all round more than all Brahma-deva which appeared in many paragraphs above)

"Radiant all round" is just the similitude that nibbāna is the best of the overall radiance of below:

Buddha claims in MN 49 Buddha knows Radiant Brahma:

the gods of streaming radiance …
ābhassare kho ahaṃ, brahme … pe …
the gods replete with glory (than above brahma) …
subhakiṇhe kho ahaṃ, brahme …

Pabhassara Citta in AN 5.23 is wholesome mind, not nibbāna.

In the same way, there are these five corruptions of the mind. When the mind is corrupted by these it’s not pliable, workable, or radiant. It’s brittle, and not completely immersed in samādhi for the ending of defilements.
Evamevaṃ kho, bhikkhave, pañcime cittassa upakkilesā, yehi upakkilesehi upakkiliṭṭhaṃ cittaṃ na ceva mudu hoti na ca kammaniyaṃ na ca pabhassaraṃ pabhaṅgu ca na ca sammā samādhiyati āsavānaṃ khayāya.
What five?
Katame pañca?
Sensual desire, ill will, dullness and drowsiness, restlessness and remorse, and doubt.
Kāmacchando, byāpādo, thinamiddhaṃ, uddhaccakukkuccaṃ, vicikicchā—

Pabhassara Citta of AN1.41-48 are the same, but Pabhassara Citta of AN1.49-50 is different because the contexts are not talking about the wholesome or unwholesome mental factors of current arising mind (AN 5.23), but AN1.49-50 talk about normal mind, bhavaṅga (the factor of keeping current becoming). It is sleeping mind, which looks like dirty when the unwholesome mental factors, external defilements, arising instead. We cannot do unwholesome or unwholesome karma while we sleep, so before the defilement mind factors arise instead, that slēping mind looks like effulgent.

Bhikkhus, the mind is effulgent, it is defiled by external defilements.
Bhikkhus. the mind is effulgent, when released from external defilelment.

The answer is very clear for me, but it can make the reader confuse because of many references, many pali term, many words referring to each other, and my English skill lacking. That's why I wrote:

However to understand it, the reader must recite and memorize Pali, first, then learn it with the inherited Tipitaka Memorizer, such as Pa-Auk because the proficiency is definitely required to understand the whole detail of each sutta. Even you can read Pali, Atthakathā, or ṭīkā, the proficiency still required.

Related answer: https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/30699/10100

BTW another way to translate viññāṇaṃ as adjective, is "the cognized" (the passive voice, referring to whatever is cognized - i.e. the objects of six senses). Which would make it "providing no ground for the cognized to land on" - see my answer.

@Andrei Volkov How to merge the passive voice in to cognizable? The answer need both: cognizable for the context, and cognized for sabhava. It' something like the cognized which is cognizable (be-cognized-able?). Thank you very much.

"To be cognized"? "Having potential to be cognized"? "Potentially cognizable"? "Potential object of cognition"? "Unknown but knowable"? "To be known"? :)

@Andrei Volkov I have edited it from cognizable to potential to be known. Thank you so much. It's really important.

So, basically, you're saying that both Bhikkhu Sujato and Thanissaro Bhikkhu have translated "viññāṇaṃ" wrongly in this context. Is this right?

That's right. It's a bit hard for the translators. 1. In a normal context, viññāṇa-noun (or the words in the center or end of sutta like that) appears in the same form before, but in this sutta it came in the different form, jānāti-verb. 2. Pāli is an oral tradition language. The speaker can abstain the word that already spoken in the previous paragraph because he and the listener are knowing it. But when the others, e.g. Ānanda, listen to it, reciting and the explanation, Atthakathā, is required. Therefore, even we can read Pāli and Atthakatha, the reciting and memorizing still required.

Few thoughts, based on my understanding of Buddhism:
One: Vijñāna is not an entity, not a substance - it is an emergent effect, an emergent phenomenon known in modern terms as "subjective experience" or "subjectivity". Most people, when they read this phrase ("Consciousness that is invisible, infinite" etc.), assume it means consciousness as something objective that exists or dwells - like electromagnetic field - but in Buddhism it means subjective awareness, subjective experience, the continuously unfolding content of cognition. So we're not talking about cosmic consciousness that lives in space, we are talking about one's actual state of mind.
Two: on many occasions Buddha spoke about "support" and "condition" and "ground" - and how any such support/condition/ground is a basis of dukkha. He then advocated transcending any notion of ground, to achieve a dynamic state of mind which is ground-less, and therefore unconditional. Consider the following image from SN 12.64:

"... Just as if there were a roofed house or a roofed hall having windows on the north, the south, or the east. When the sun rises, and a ray has entered by way of the window, where does it land?"
  "On the western wall, lord."
  "And if there is no western wall, where does it land?"
  "On the ground, lord."
  "And if there is no ground, where does it land?"
  "On the water, lord."
  "And if there is no water, where does it land?"
  "It does not land, lord."
  "In the same way, when there is no [ground such as] desire, attachment, craving, then viññāṇaṃ [=cognition or cognized] does not land and does not grow."

Also, in MN21 there is a following image:

"... Suppose a person was to come along with dye such as red lac, turmeric, indigo, or rose madder, and say: ‘I shall draw pictures on the sky, making pictures appear there.’ What do you think, mendicants? Could that person draw pictures on the sky?”
  “No, sir."
  "Why is that? Because the sky is formless and anidassano. It’s not easy to draw pictures there."

Here the word is used in context of blame and blamelessness, indicating a condition when one's pure morals provide no ground for any blame. So, anidassano refers to something that provides no surface to lean on, no basis for something to happen or to be done.
Adding points One and Two together, we can reach conclusion that Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ means subjective experience that is completely open and groundless, without support, that feels like the infinite radiant sky.
This of course matches all of my teachers' descriptions of Enlightenment. For official sources, here's Dogen:

The water is clean, right down to the ground,
  Fishes are swimming like fishes.
  The sky is wide, clear through to the heavens,
  And birds are flying like birds.

or Pema Chodron, a student of Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche:

"...Then he [Trungpa Rinpoche] goes on and he talks about the mantra. And the mantra is: OM GATE GATE PARAGATE PARASAMGATE BODHI SVAHA.
In other words, a way to practice the profound prajnaparamita is actually to say this mantra —as well as the on-going practice of continually letting go, or letting be, training in a flexible, open, ready mind.
[Chogyam Trungpa] Rinpoche's translation is: OM, GONE (GATE is gone), GONE, (then PARAGATE) GONE BEYOND, (PARASAMGATE) GONE COMPLETELY BEYOND, (BODHI) AWAKE, (SVAHA) SO BE IT. So: OM, GONE, GONE, GONE BEYOND, GONE COMPLETELY BEYOND, AWAKE, SO BE IT.
There's lots of translations of this, and one is: OM, TRANSCENDING, EVER TRANSCENDING, TRANSCENDING EVEN TRANSCENDING, TRANSCENDING EVEN TRANSCENDING OF TRANSCENDING, SUCHNESS, SO BE IT.
What is wonderful about this mantra is that it is not a description of some fruition. It's actually a description of a journey that we are all on. We are all on this journey of going, going, going beyond, going even beyond.
No matter where we are, we can move on to the next beyond. Do you see? It's not a description of: I made it! It's like this! It's a description of: OM, groundless, even more groundless, can it get more groundless than this, Oh my gosh, it's ultimately groundless, there's no ground!, and then BODHI could be translated as Aaaaaaaaaahhhhiiiiiiiii! [Makes a falling scream] So be it! [Audience laughs]

To summarize, I think

Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ anantaṃ sabbato pabhaṃ

means

Cognition with no support, unbounded, completely transparent.

or perhaps, if we take viññāṇaṃ with an -m to be an adjective, then

Providing no ground for the cognized [to land and grow into dukkha], without a limit [to stop it], completely transparent.

which reminds of the following instruction given by Buddha in Bahiya Sutta:

"... Then, Bāhiya, you should train yourself thus: In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself. When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Bāhiya, there is no you in connection with that. When there is no you in connection with that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress."

Either way this is clearly a description of Non-abiding Nirvana (apratisthita-nirvana), also known as "suchness" (tathata).

it's the reason why Buddha uses both Viññāṇa (object) and Citta (subject) in many sutta, such as MN U Mahāpuṇṇamasuttaṃ

We have several interesting answers for viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ anantaṃ sabbato pabhaṃ. Bonn and Damith say that this grammatical variant of viññāṇaṃ refers to "that which is cognizable (by consciousness)" i.e. Nibbana. I think the rest of the verse also corresponds to Ud 8.1-4. On the other hand, 8527, OyaMist and you came to the same conclusion. You translated it as "cognition with no support, unbounded, completely transparent." And 8527 translated it as unestablished consciousness, more or less. Of course, in both cases, it somehow ends up to be Nibbana.

In Buddhism cognition (vijnana) is that which is being cognized (vijnapti), they are not two separate things. It's not like cognition sits there and waits to cognize something. We speak of them analytically as two separate things but in fact they arise as one and the same.

In Kevaddha Sutta (DN 11) it has mentioned that,

Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ anantaṃ sabbato pabhaṃ
  Ettha āpo ca paṭhavī tejo vāyo na gādhati
  Ettha dīghañca rassañca aṇuṃ thūlaṃ subhāsubhaṃ
  Ettha nāmañca rūpañca asesaṃ uparujjhati
  Viññāṇassa nirodhena etthetaṃ uparujjhatīti.

This is a verse about Nibbana. Meaning of the verse is mentioned below;

Viññāṇaṃ - Nibbana

Explanation: The word "Viññāṇa" has three interpretations.

"vijanatiti vinnanam" - 'get to know' is known as Viññāṇa.
According to this explanation, the word "Viññāṇa" defined as an agent noun. In other words consciousness is defined as the doer who cognizes objects.
"vijanati etenati vinnanam" - 'get to know by the use of' is known as Viññāṇa.
According to this explanation, the word "Viññāṇa" defined as an ablative noun. In other words consciousness is defined as the instrument used to cognize objects.
"vijanana mattam vinnanam" - in the sense of knowing it is known as Viññāṇa.
According to this explanation, the word "Viññāṇa" defined as its true nature. This is the most suitable definition because the consciousness is conditioned. i.e. it has no power of independently appear without the help of its causes. Its mere function is knowing the object.

Here in this verse, the word Viññāṇaṃ (consciousness) was described using the second definition which I have provided above. "Viññāṇaṃ" used to mention "what should be cognized by consciousness (more precisely by the four supermundane wholesome path consciousness)". So, it has used to mention nothing else but Nibbana. We can find more evidence for this interpretation by looking at the commentary (Atthakathā) on Kevaddha Sutta:

Tattha viññātabban ti viññānaη, nibbānassa taη nāmaη.

Anidassanaṃ - This word has two definitions in this verse;

Cannot be seen with eye consciousness.
Cannot provide an example.

Explanation for definition 1: There are two types of rūpa.

Sanidassana rūpa - Vanna rūpa. In other words whatever visible (or known) to eye consciousness.
Anidassana rūpa - Rūpa which are not visible (or known) to eye consciousness. (For example, Shabdha rūpa, Gandha rūpa, Potthabbha rūpa, etc...)

Here in this verse, the word "Anidassanaṃ" used not to mention a rūpa but to emphasize that Nibbana is not visible to the eye consciousness. In other words, Nibbana cannot be the object for eye consciousness.
Also according to the book, A Dictionary of the Pali Language by Robert Caesar Childers, the word "Anidassana" has the following meaning;

Anidassana - Beyond the reach of sight, Immaterial

Explanation for definition 2: There is no equal dhamma in this universe which can be provided as an example to Nibbana.
Anidassanam = A + Nidassanam
According to the book, A Dictionary of the Pali Language by Robert Caesar Childers;

Nidassanam - Pointing out, Indicating, Designation; Example, Illustration; Sight, View

and

A, and before a vowel AN - A negative particle, used only as an inseparable prefix.

So, here in this verse, the word "Anidassanaṃ" used to emphasize that an example cannot be provided to explain Nibbana.

Anantaṃ - has no end nor boundary

Anantaṃ = An + Antaṃ
According to the book, A Dictionary of the Pali Language by Robert Caesar Childers;

Antaṃ = Anto = End; Limit, Boundary; Proximity, Side; Destruction, Death; Lowest, Inferior; Interior

Here in this verse, the word "Anantaṃ" used to mention that the Nibbana has no end nor boundary. All the conditioned things has three stages, uppāda (arise), titi (exist), bhañga (cease). Since Nibbana is unconditioned it has no beginning nor end but only existence.

You can use Anidassanaṃ directly without Rūpa because in Abhi. Dhammasaṅginī Sappaṭighatika specifies "asaṅkhatā   ca   dhātu (nibbana)" directly.

Thanks @Bonn sir for the valuable information! It's really helpful.

Vinnana is not Nibbana. Therefore downvoted.

@Medhiṇī Please read whole answer before come to a conclusion. Bonn (in his answer) & I (in my answer) explained why word Viññāṇa used to mention Nibbana.

@Damith My conclusion, as you put it, is based on experience. And based on that I can only say: Nibbana has not 'only existence' (your last sentence).

@Medhiṇī, I cannot understand how one can say Pali definitions are personal experiences... In addition to that, first you've said Vinnana is not Nibbana in this verse. Then you've said Nibbana has not only existence. Have you meant that Nibbana has either start or end by this? I've meant that it doesn't. Why do you change your words time to time?

@Damith I'll leave it at that.

This teaching was not given to Buddhists. No one got enlightened. It has no relationship to Heartwood Buddhism.
Heartwood Buddhism teaches there can be no consciousness without nama-rupa (MN 9; SN 12.67; SN 22.53; MN 38; etc). But this teaching, given to unfaithful Brahma gods and Brahmins, says in infinite luminous consciousness, nama-rupa is destroyed.
Its not Buddhism. The nama-rupa referred to is the nama-rupa of Brahmanism. The Buddha is speaking in the language of Brahmanism to Brahmins.
In the suttas, there are two types of nama-rupa:

Nama-rupa for Buddhists, which is defined as earth, wind, fire, water, feeling, perception, intention, contact & attention.

Nama-rupa of Brahmins, which is defined as 'naming-forms', per the Vedas; per DN 15; which the modern scholars say was composed for Brahmins.

Honoring viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ cannot be a Buddhist. Must be a Hindu (Brahmin). Taking faith in teaching given to stubborn faithless Brahma. Please remember, the suttas say the Buddha is the teacher of gods & men. Often, what the Buddha teaches is for the gods and not for the human state, which is the enlightened state (per SN 56.47).
Ajahn Sujato says viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ is immaterial jhana & not Nibbana. But I disagree. Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ is just themeless concentration of basic concentration.
Brahma delights in creating the world by naming forms. Buddha tells Brahma to stop naming forms; stop creating; and start meditating.
Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ is not the non-Buddha relinking consciousness of the covert Brahmin named Buddhaghosa, who dedicated his Visuddhimagga for his rebirth in a Brahma world. This is because a pure Nibbanic consciousness cannot be reborn.
The description of "invisible, infinite and radiant all round" sounds very similar to the "luminous mind" (pabhassara citta) from AN 1.51-52. However, please note! The "luminous mind" (pabhassara citta) from AN 1.51-52 is something that can be defiled. It is not Nibbana, also.

Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements.
AN 1.51-52

AN 1.51-52 proves viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ is not Nibbana because pabhassara citta & viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ can be defiled and become dirty & filthy.
Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ is not said to be "asesa" ("remainderless"). It is not Nibbana. It is not relinking. It is just the luminous mind without thoughts & naming. It is the type of mind a beginner to meditation should have.
I recommend to all sincere Buddhist to not waste their time with this teaching of viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ. It is just a wild goose chase about nothing.

Just a polite question...what then is your view of formless realm of infinity of consciousness?

The formless realm of infinity of consciousness is not without nama, i.e., not without contact, feeling, perception, intention & attention. Please refer to MN 111: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.111.than.html . Where as i posted, viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ is said to be without nama. This can only occur when "nama" has the Vedic Brahmanistic meaning. Regards

You have asked several questions, but I think your answers may all lie in "the planes of consciousness".
The phrase viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ is used rarely and is found in two suttas: MN49 and DN11. More commonly, one sees viññāṇañcāyatanaṃ used in the context of "plane of consciousness". The seven planes of consciousness are listed in several places, but AN7.44 is the shortest list:

“Mendicants, there are these seven planes of consciousness. What seven? There are sentient beings that are diverse in body and diverse in perception, such as human beings, some gods, and some beings in the underworld. This is the first plane of consciousness.
There are sentient beings that are diverse in body and unified in perception, such as the gods reborn in Brahmā’s Group through the first absorption. This is the second plane of consciousness.
There are sentient beings that are unified in body and diverse in perception, such as the gods of streaming radiance. This is the third plane of consciousness.
There are sentient beings that are unified in body and unified in perception, such as the gods replete with glory. This is the fourth plane of consciousness.
There are sentient beings that have gone totally beyond perceptions of form. With the ending of perceptions of impingement, not focusing on perceptions of diversity, aware that ‘space is infinite’, they have been reborn in the dimension of infinite space. This is the fifth plane of consciousness.
There are sentient beings that have gone totally beyond the dimension of infinite space. Aware that ‘consciousness is infinite’, they have been reborn in the dimension of infinite consciousness. This is the sixth plane of consciousness.
There are sentient beings that have gone totally beyond the dimension of infinite consciousness. Aware that ‘there is nothing at all’, they have been reborn in the dimension of nothingness. This is the seventh plane of consciousness.
These are the seven planes of consciousness.

Your reference to MN49 is to Baka the Brahmā, who was stuck in the second plane of consciousness, thinking it eternal. The Buddha disappears from Baka's perception into the higher planes, which astounds Baka.
An important clue to Baka's understanding is how the Buddha explains it:

A galaxy extends a thousand times as far
as the moon and sun revolve
and the shining ones light up the quarters.
And there you wield your power.

In other words, one might feel the vastness of the universe and the span of its lifetime as infinite, but it is not. In fact, modern astronomy points out that everything we see is less than 14 billion years old and therefore prone to death, fading away and ... suffering.
The Buddha went beyond ALL the planes of consciousness. Even the seventh one.

Going totally beyond the dimension of nothingness, they enter and remain in the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. This is the seventh liberation.
Going totally beyond the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, they enter and remain in the cessation of perception and feeling. This is the eighth liberation.

As i understand it:
Nidassana means that is apparent, eg in the sutta is of a canvas that can be painted as opposed to something not-apparent like space which can not be painted.
Vinnanam a noun consciousness
Therefore:
Consciousness not apparent
I think this is what the text says.
Some people might have a problem with this but these people will likewise have problem with all the seemingly paradoxical passages:

riend Sāriputta, could a bhikkhu obtain such a state of concentration that (1) he would not be percipient of earth in relation to earth; (2) of water in relation to water; (3) of fire in relation to fire; (4) of air in relation to air; (5) of the base of the infinity of space in relation to the base of the infinity of space; (6) of the base of the infinity of consciousness in relation to the base of the infinity of consciousness; (7) of the base of nothingness in relation to the base of nothingness; (8) of the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception in relation to the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception; (9) of this world in relation to this world; (10) of the other world in relation to the other world, but he would still be percipient?”
“He could, friend Ānanda.”
“But how, friend Sāriputta, could he obtain such a state of concentration?”
“On one occasion, friend Ānanda, I was dwelling right here in Sāvatthī in the Blind Men’s Grove. There I attained such a state of concentration that I was not percipient of earth in relation to earth; of water in relation to water; of fire in relation to fire; of air in relation to air; of the base of the infinity of space in relation to the base of the infinity of space; of the base of the infinity of consciousness in relation to the base of the infinity of consciousness; of the base of nothingness in relation to the base of nothingness; of the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception in relation to the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception; of this world in relation to this world; of the other world in relation to the other world, but I was still percipient.”
“But of what was the Venerable Sāriputta percipient on that occasion?”
“One perception arose and another perception ceased in me: ‘The cessation of existence is nibbāna; the cessation of existence is nibbāna.’ Just as, when a fire of twigs is burning, one flame arises and another flame ceases, so one perception arose and another perception ceased in me: ‘The cessation of existence is nibbāna; the cessation of existence is nibbāna.’ On that occasion, friend, I was percipient: ‘The cessation of existence is nibbāna.’”

Basically you have to imagine what the answer is if that same question is posed in terms of congnizance rather than percepience and you will see that the passages are analogical.

perception & consciousness are conjoined, not disjoined, what one perceives that one cognizes.

If one thinks that vinnanam anidassana posits a super consciousness then one will posit that the above sutta posits a super perception.
Furthermore the same will happen with this passage:

There is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, enters & remains in the cessation of perception & feeling. This is another pleasure more extreme & refined than that.

Here they will analogically criticize the text for positing a super feeling.

Now it's possible, Ananda, that some wanderers of other persuasions might say, 'Gotama the contemplative speaks of the cessation of perception & feeling and yet describes it as pleasure. What is this? How can this be?' When they say that, they are to be told, 'It's not the case, friends, that the Blessed One describes only pleasant feeling as included under pleasure. Wherever pleasure is found, in whatever terms, the Blessed One describes it as pleasure.'"

Likewise the verse when properly translated is criticized by people of other persuasions:
"This verse speaks of cessation of consciousness but describes it as consciousness"
There are other Sutta related to this which talk about consciousness unestablished, eg:

Suppose, bhikkhus, there was a house or a hall with a peaked roof, with windows on the northern, southern, and eastern sides. When the sun rises and a beam of light enters through a window, where would it become established?”
“On the western wall, venerable sir.”
“If there were no western wall, where would it become established?”
“On the earth, venerable sir.”
“If there were no earth, where would it become established?”
“On the water, venerable sir.”
“If there were no water, where would it become established?”
“It would not become established anywhere, venerable sir.”
“So too, bhikkhus, if there is no lust for the nutriment edible food … for the nutriment contact … for the nutriment mental volition … for the nutriment consciousness … consciousness does not become established there and come to growth. Where consciousness does not become established and come to growth … … I say that is without sorrow, anguish, and despair.” https://suttacentral.net/sn12.64/en/bodhi

Another here:

"If a monk abandons passion for the property of consciousness, then owing to the abandonment of passion, the support is cut off, and there is no base for consciousness. Consciousness, thus unestablished, not proliferating, not performing any function, is released. https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.055.than.html

Another yet:

That, bhikkhus, is Mara the Evil One searching for the consciousness of the clansman Vakkali, wondering: ‘Where now has the consciousness of the clansman Vakkali been established?’ However, bhikkhus, with consciousness unestablished, the clansman Vakkali has attained final Nibbāna. https://suttacentral.net/sn22.87/en/bodhi

Now there are several ways of translating vinnanam anidassana which are not literal but i prefer the literal one.
I think that this is more or less the proper sutta analysis.

We have several interesting answers for viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ anantaṃ sabbato pabhaṃ. Bonn and Damith say that this grammatical variant of viññāṇaṃ refers to "that which is cognizable (by consciousness)" i.e. Nibbana. I think the rest of the verse also corresponds to Ud 8.1-4. On the other hand, Andrei, OyaMist and you came to the same conclusion. Andrei translated it as "cognition with no support, unbounded, completely transparent." And you translate it as unestablished consciousness, more or less. Of course, in both cases, it somehow ends up to be Nibbana.

Nibbananirodhadhatu is definitely what is being talked about there as i see it. It is the cessation principle which is void of delusion and seeing it with wisdom destroys taints. It is also referred to as the 'asoka' state and is directly known by one who can direct the mind to it and enter samadhi in dependence on it. Therefore it is said:

to this excellent thoroughbred of a man, absorbed in this way, the gods, together with Indra, the Brahmas, & Pajapati, pay homage even from afar:
'Homage to you, O thoroughbred man.
Homage to you, O superlative man —
you of whom we don't know even what it is
dependent on which
you're absorbed.'" https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an11/an11.010.than.html

It's the only element or principle not included in the allness of the all and unknown to even to the gods lest they are also disciples of the foremost teacher. Good luck

It is also noteworthy that there is a commentary which states that sannavedananirodha attainments are "on the treshold of Nibbana". I like this way of putting it because Destruction of taints has Nibbana for designation and it is attained by entering sannavedananirodha and thus seeing with wisdom.

It com to sn41.6 https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn41/sn41.006.than.html designation is sn45.7 https://suttacentral.net/sn45.7/en/bodhi and the seeing with wisdom part is mn31 https://suttacentral.net/mn31/en/bodhi

What is the invisible consciousness or consciousness without surface described in MN 49 and DN 11?

In a previous post, I used the dark matter concept in the scientific world as an analogy to VinnanamAnidassanam. And just like dark matter, there're lots of hypothesis and speculations about the entity but still no concrete formal description of what it is. In the scientific world, until the day when scienfific instruments are quick enough, sharp enough, and sophisticated enough to capture dark matter, would we have a better idea of what dark matter is exactly. Similarly on the Buddhist side, one'd need to develop one's faculty until it's quick enough, sharp enough, and sophisticated enough to really see what exactly VinnanaAnidssanam is. Below is Ven. Thanissaro's comment in DN 11:

Viññanam anidassanam. This term is nowhere explained in the Canon, although MN 49 mentions that it "does not partake in the allness of the All" — the "All" meaning the six internal and six external sense media (see SN 35.23). In this it differs from the consciousness factor in dependent co-arising, which is defined in terms of the six sense media. Lying outside of time and space, it would also not come under the consciousness-aggregate, which covers all consciousness near and far; past, present, and future. However, the fact that it is outside of time and space — in a dimension where there is no here, there, or in between (Ud 1.10), no coming, no going, or staying (Ud 8.1) — means that it cannot be described as permanent or omnipresent, terms that have meaning only within space and time. The standard description of nibbana after death is, "All that is sensed, not being relished, will grow cold right here." (See MN 140 and Iti 44.) Again, as "all" is defined as the sense media, this raises the question as to whether consciousness without feature is not covered by this "all." However, AN 4.174 warns that any speculation as to whether anything does or doesn't remain after the remainderless stopping of the six sense media is to "objectify non-objectification," which gets in the way of attaining the non-objectified. Thus this is a question that is best put aside.

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

sort: votes


text:
I don't like people but I like buddhism
I'm a bit confused. I had a rather crappy childhood. Very disfunctional family and lots of bullying and abuse both at home and at school. It kind of made me very distrusting of people. I learnt at a young age that people would hurt me, let me down, abandon me and could not be trusted.
Many people seemed to not like me for no particular reason other than that I was not a stereotype of how a boy should be in the culture in which I grew up. It really knocked any confidence out of me and I ended up hanging out with other misfits, fell into the wrong crowd and had a drug habit for many years from my teens to my late 20s.
I had a string of failed disfunctional relationships and seemed to have an inability to form healthy supportive ones not only on an intimate level but also friendships. I eventually met someone who stuck around for longer but they left in the end which really broke my heart.
Half way through that relationship I started practicing insight meditation the kind that Joseph Goldstein and others of that ilk teach. Its been approx 7 years now I think. So anyway I thought that buddhism might help me to be a happier person, more compassionate, more kind, more accepting etc but the truth is I don't feel any of those things.
I'm actually a recluse now at 50 years old as I cannot tolerate most people. I've cut out any friends I had and I can't stand my family at all. My niece is getting married  but I'm not even going because I don't want to be around people and all the crap that is involved. I'm actually very lonely and think about how nice it will be to die sometimes. I hate my work because I feel im capable of so much more but because of my lack of confidence and self belief I don't try to do something else. I have been this way for so long that it's virtually impossible to get any decent work now because I have this really sketchy work history and people don't give me a go and so I never can get anywhere financially. No money, no friends and hate my family. So what is the point really in continuing on. It's all just this never ending uphill struggle and I'm sick of it.
What im confused about is how I can appreciate the teachings of Buddha and practice meditation but at the same time be this miserable lonely misanthropic person. I realise I have created these conditions but they are the result of my reactions towards people and how I felt and still feel so unsafe because of abuse etc. I have lived with maladaptive coping mechanisms that have protected me on the one hand but ruined my life on the other.
I wish I could leave the city and live on some beautiful land somewhere surrounded by nature but it's not possible because of money. I feel like a caged animal just waiting for my time to end.  I do have some nice calm moments and feelings during sitting sometimes but I don't feel free.  I don't even want to practice metta etc because I just don't like people. Only being honest. I feel completely different about animals. I love animals and feel very kind and compassionate towards them but people just annoy me with their egotism, vanity, superficiality, stupidness, ignorance, need I go on.   So my question is how can I utilise buddhism and meditation to effect some real positive change because so far it's not working. I seem to be getting worse.

Arturia, hopefully you can find here the answer you're looking for from the Buddhism perspective. But in your question you mention quite a few other things to give some background - which would be off topic to discuss here. If you felt it might be of a benefit to talk to someone about them - for example you wanting to die, one option would be to write to Samaritans (jo@samaritans.org), this is a UK based charity, but at least e-mailing will be fine from anywhere.

You don't have to like people but you do have to love them. That is, one needs to separate superficial personalities from underlying consciousness, sentience and humanity. The first requirement is to like yourself. If you cannot do this then liking others will be difficult. Buddhist practice should sort all this out in the end  but whether it will take a week or a decade will depend will depend on the individual. I've been accused of liking trees more than people so I know what you're talking about.

The topic is too big to do proper justice in one response, but to summarize my thoughts very briefly:

Every crappy childhood is unique and every dysfunctional family is dysfunctional in its own way - but believe me or not, these type of issues are a lot more common than you realize. Pretty much every Russian person I know had alcoholism and violence issues in their childhood families. Many were subjects of bullying at school. I was one of them. Not saying mine - or others' - problems are equal to yours, we are all "unique" - but just like with snowflakes there are many similarities for sure.
Surprisingly, much real-life Buddhism (not the Buddhism you read about but the Buddhism you come to face when you talk to live Buddhist teachers) is dedicated exactly to solving these types of mental/emotional/circumstantial issues that come from messy karma passed on through generations. All this stuff you're talking about is completely normal, completely standard, and is bread and butter of Buddhist teachers. This is good, because it means there is a whole system in place for 2600+ years that was designed exactly to deal with these issues.
Of course the problem is with you, or rather, with bad karma you inherited - so the difficult part is meeting a teacher you can connect with. This basically means, meeting a teacher that your bad karma will feel good about. A teacher whose manner of expression will make sense to you (and to your bad karma), a teacher you (and your bad karma) will trust enough to hang around for a long time. And of course, the issue with bad karma is - it shapes your life in such way that you can't possibly get in touch with a teacher let alone establish a long-term relationship. Who knows, it may never happen - or it may happen tomorrow, it is useless to worry about this, another source of dukkha.
So meanwhile, start where you are. There is absolutely no way to jump somewhere where you are not. The only way to get somewhere is to work with what you have and then slowly slowly it will build. So start by learning to feel good about what's already good. You're a recluse? Fine! Buddha said, "enlightened person's mind inclines towards seclusion". You don't like people? Fine, most yogis did not. See? I just rotated your coordinate system in such a way that you can feel good about these things. That's the trick. Feelings depend on perspective. When you feel bad, that's because you're stuck in a perspective that says that something is wrong with you. Stop letting it chew you. Learn to be in control of perspective. First, learn to feel good about where you are. Stop comparing your present moment with some imagined life in the mountains etc. Stop worrying about friends, money etc. We only worry about this stuff because we heard it must be so good and now we compare ourselves with that idea. Stop doing that to yourself. You are here. The biggest achievement, the sweetest Nirvana, the highest Goal, the purest happiness - is to learn to be happy wherever/however you are. There is nothing, nothing, NOTHING higher than that. If you can do that - you are much better off than living in the mountains, or having friends, or money, or anything else you can think of.
The skill of feeling good about the present moment is called "standing on your two feet". It is something you must learn, like a baby learning to walk. Then, once you can stand on your own and walk around without losing the balance - only then can you start interacting with other people.
Most problems you list with people (egotism, vanity, superficiality, stupidness, ignorance etc.) are absolutely real. The world is pretty messed up. It's not you, it actually is a mess. However, as others pointed out, it is not because those people are awesomely strong and super intelligent and just chose such a life as their ideal way of living - no, not at all. It is exactly because we are weak and ignorant and are desperately trying to survive and get on top of each other - that we created and are maintaining this messy world. So once you can stand and walk, and keep your balance when pushed - then perhaps you can go and help some of them, so going forward there is a little more harmony and a little less mess.

I know it's hard. I am just like you, I was just like you, and now I'm just a bit ahead of you in that I can (mostly) stand and (sometimes) walk on my own. I know it's possible to learn this skill. I know and see it directly, from my own experience. If it weren't possible to learn this skill, I wouldn't say it's possible. So try to stop your head spinning with all these thoughts about the world, the people, your life, your childhood, what's wrong about all that - and try to focus. Drop all that, and learn to be stable and happy with nothing special. Learn to be happy when lying in bed, when taking shower, when eating, when sitting and doing nothing. This Peace is unsurpassable. If you master it, you win. Then slooowly, slooowly start moving around while learning to keep that peace. If there are any doubts/questions/confusion - ask here. There is nothing else that you need.

Hi Andrei, thank you for your in depth but simple answer. It's what I need to hear. Most people just link me to some rambling suttas that I never read or quote some scriptures. I appreciate that they take the time although it's usually not helpful but your answer spoke to the core of the issue. I'm going to re read and then re read it again when I'm having doubts.

@Arturia - You're lucky to receive such a good answer. I would add only that if you wish to avoid the sutras (as it seems) then there are some great teachers on Youtube.who address these issues directly. It's a little weird that YT has become such a good source of teachings.

When you feel like you don't like people because of their "egotism, vanity, superficiality, stupidness, ignorance", you can use this opportunity to cultivate the brahmavihara of compassion (karuna).
The primary purpose of cultivating compassion is to cure this strong aversion that you have of other people. Aversion or hatred (dosa or dvesha) is one of the three poisons that will prevent your progress. The secondary purpose is for you to regain a healthy social connection with the people around you.
Why are they the way they are? For e.g. if your grandmother who has senile dementia lashes out at you in anger or doesn't behave like normal people do, would you be judgemental or contemptuous against her? No. You would be compassionate towards her, because you understand that she has senile dementia.
Similarly, you can generate compassion by trying to understand that other people are suffering and there may be genuine underlying reasons for their suffering and condition. It could be their life situation (e.g. poverty or undergoing divorce) or even mental states (e.g. ignorance, or clouded by anger or other negative emotions).
Instead of playing the role of a victim or a contemptuous person or a hateful person, you can become compassionate towards others by recognizing that people who demonstrate "egotism, vanity, superficiality, stupidness, ignorance" are actually suffering.
By tending to your own renunciation, you may be feeling more calm, but by cultivating compassion, you can create the balance needed in dealing with others. Renunciation and equanimity is how you deal with your own suffering. Meanwhile, compassion is how you deal with others' suffering.
Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote in "The Balanced Way":

Like a bird in flight borne by its two wings, the practice of Dhamma
  is sustained by two contrasting qualities whose balanced development
  is essential to straight and steady progress. These two qualities are
  renunciation and compassion. As a doctrine of renunciation the Dhamma
  points out that the path to liberation is a personal course of
  training that centers on the gradual control and mastery of desire,
  the root cause of suffering. As a teaching of compassion the Dhamma
  bids us to avoid harming others, to act for their welfare, and to help
  realize the Buddha's own great resolve to offer the world the way to
  the Deathless.
Considered in isolation, renunciation and compassion have inverse
  logics that at times seem to point us in opposite directions. The one
  steers us to greater solitude aimed at personal purification, the
  other to increased involvement with others issuing in beneficent
  action. Yet, despite their differences, renunciation and compassion
  nurture each other in dynamic interplay throughout the practice of the
  path, from its elementary steps of moral discipline to its culmination
  in liberating wisdom. The synthesis of the two, their balanced fusion,
  is expressed most perfectly in the figure of the Fully Enlightened
  One, who is at once the embodiment of complete renunciation and of
  all-embracing compassion.
Both renunciation and compassion share a common root in the encounter
  with suffering. The one represents our response to suffering
  confronted in our own individual experience, the other our response to
  suffering witnessed in the lives of others. Our spontaneous reactions,
  however, are only the seeds of these higher qualities, not their
  substance. To acquire the capacity to sustain our practice of Dhamma,
  renunciation and compassion must be methodically cultivated, and this
  requires an ongoing process of reflection which transmutes our initial
  stirrings into full-fledged spiritual virtues.

That's advice but it must be hard to practice as a young child, hard to act as "the adult in the room".

On the essential level, Buddhist practise brings equanimity. The modern world isn't really a place that inspires much appreciation. While it sounds like you have had difficulties in your life, even if these difficulties didn't occur, the world would be similar because these difficult experiences are symptomatic of the world. For example, for the last 7 years, proxy terrorists have been attacking the Syrian people and, now, since the the terrorists have been defeated, first the USA and today Israel is bombing the Syrian people. No one cares! The Western world has no more moral values. People just engaged in self-absorbed narcissism. These are opportunities to give up attachment to the world. But that you appreciate the Buddha; that is the best & something potentially of great value. I often talk to the Buddha. Its like the Buddha is my only true friend. When I talk to him; he replies with his wisdom (which naturally is just what I have read in the suttas).
When Buddhist preach all this condescending stuff about "compassion"; forget it. Its just non-sense. See the world clearly, develop equanimity and be beyond the world (per the Lokavagga).
I think we discussed leaving the city, before. You can always try here; even just for a day or weekend.

Hi thanks for your comments.  I had a look at the Lokavagga but like much of the suttas I don't get it. It's written in this kind of mystical way that makes it impossible for me to get the underlying  message. I get that it's saying to not be drawn in to the ways of the world but that's about it. I had forgotten about the wat so thanks for reminding me.

Actually quite some people care about Syria, which is also why the US entered reluctantly and at least claimed to do so to support suppressed people. That being said, this seems like judging people, which wouldn't speak for having reached equanimity. I'd leave all the modern world bashing aside, it's simply a distraction. Your perception may explain why you'd want to reach a detached state, but not how you do it or how OP should.

You seem to not understand what equanimity means. Equanimity requires an object. When you see an immoral world, you become dispassionate towards it. This is exactly what the Buddha taught, namely, to see evil and then become dispassionate towards evil. Please do not reply to this comment because the purpose of the comments section here is not for debate. I provided my answer. Please respect my answer. Thank you

The truth is there is not so much thing in an ordinary human that is to be liked. If you can see that it can be a sign that you see the nature of reality more clearly and you're moving in spirituality quickly. It is better for you to either live in solitude or find a sangha, surround yourself with meditators who are at least have some degree of awareness that make them different then the ordinary people who are just enslaved by the evil nature of humanity.
I may be wrong, but as I remember Thich Nhat Hanh said that an ordinary person is like a "dead person". Who don't have awareness. I think "dead person" means "dead body" here. Because the being that leaves the body after death have awareness but the "body" don't. An ordinary person is really like a dead body or like a tree who don't really have awareness and living in complete darkness. So you can literally see an ordinary person as "mentally ill" and there is nothing wrong in that. This way of looking to the human world can grow compassion, understanding and equanimity in you. But the environment, society and the culture that effects the person makes a difference. There are places/cultures/environments in the world that really not so much different than "Mordor" LOL. If a person lives in a  Western country or in a Buddhist country he/she can be grateful for living in "relatively" more sane societies. Also, in these countries you can build a "Sangha", which makes a huge difference in peace of your mind and your success in the Buddhist path of freedom from suffering.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/sangha

I'm not a very experienced in Buddhism, but here's my 2 cents...The people you are talking about might turn out to be pretty decent people, given the chance, but your imagination is making up assumptions, thus provoking a negative reaction towards them. So you guessed it right, you (your thoughts) are causing this problem to manifest. How does this help you? Well you already know the reason for this to happen, you only need to ask yourself this - if I had a choice to change this would I want to, or would I rather let fear make this choice for me?

So my question is how can I utilise buddhism and meditation to effect
  some real positive change because so far it's not working.

Hi there. I thought i'd try to answer your question.
I'd like to start by making communicating to you that the situation you find yourself in is preciously the situation for which the Buddha taught. This is stated explicitly in the Tissa Sutta.

Suppose, Tissa, there are two men, one of whom does not know his
  way, and the other does. And the man who does not know his way asks
  the other to direct him. He replies: 'Yes, friend, this is the way. Go
  on for a while and you will see that the road forks. Don't go to the
  left but take the right-handed path. Go on for a while and you will
  see a dense jungle. Keep going, and you will see a great sunken swamp.
  Keep going and you will see a steep precipice. Go a bit further and
  you will see a delightful stretch of level ground.'
"I have made this parable, Tissa, to help you to understand. This is
  the explanation. 'The man who does not know his way' denotes the
  worldling. 'The man who knows the way' is the Tathaagata, the
  Arahant, the Fully Self-enlightened One. 'The road-fork' is the state
  of wavering. 'The left-hand path' is the false eightfold path, that
  is: wrong view... wrong concentration. 'The right-hand path' is the
  Noble Eightfold Path, that is: Right View... Right Concentration. 'The
  dense jungle' means ignorance, 'the great sunken swamp' denotes
  sense-desires, 'the steep precipice' denotes anger and despair,
  'the delightful stretch of level ground,' Tissa, denotes Nibbaana.
  Cheer up, Tissa, cheer up! I am here to advise you, help you and teach
  you!

Stumbling between the jungle, the swamp, and the precipice is indeed exhausting, and unpleasant, and by your answer it seems that. having taken a right turn at the road-fork you have been stumbling through all three. That is why it is much easier when one sticks to the "path" that is, the noble eight-fold path.

Right view
Right resolve
Right speech
Right action
Right livelihood
Right effort
Right mindfulness
Right concentration

You sound like you are working very hard on being a good person. Unfortunately, it's not just about how hard you work, you also need to know where to go - how to stay on the path.
If you were to ask my advice, i'd be concentrating on developing Right view, while continuing to maintain your meditative practice as a support for that. Right view is said to be, by the Buddha "the forerunner" to the other 7 aspects. I see "Right view" being the one that allows you to develop the other 7. Right view is given by the Buddha as follows:

There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are
  fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next
  world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn
  beings; there are contemplatives & brahmans who, faring rightly &
  practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having
  directly known & realized it for themselves.’ This is the right view
  with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in acquisitions.

With reference to you, i'd say this means the following:

The hard work you're putting in is worthwhile, not just in this life, but also in your future lives and also in the future of this world.
Spirits, deities, hell-beings, Brahma, Mara, other varieties of special beings; they're really there.
There are people like Jesus Christ and others, with whom, while we might be disagree on the details, are very right on the general structure of this life and the next.

I think I could write more, if you think it would help you. I wish you well.

Ok so here is the thing. I often read about the 4NT and the 8FP and I understand the concept and what it's saying but I guess one can't just force it. My understanding is that insight is meant to happen and then it can deeply penetrate. I just don't feel happy in this society and system. I feel trapped by it. Thinking to myself well everything is impermanent and unsatisfactory etc so no point in clinging doesn't change how I feel nor stop me wanting more financial security, better friendships, a partner, a nice place to live, my life to be different to what it is.

What I need is some solid advise about how to put this information into practical use in every day situations. Otherwise it's all just religious claptrap and means nothing.

Thanks Arturia. Yeah, i was thinking the same thing about the post myself when i was taking the bus home. Okay. I'm gonna write a fair bit now, with a totally practical perspective. I'll make it another answer, i hope this one will work better for you.

Okay I wrote another post. I could introduce you (electronically unless you live in London) to my friend Stuart. He's lived a bunch of his life homeless, and he uses a Zimmer frame to get around at (45?). Injured army vet. Happy as Larry he is. He could tell you how to make a comfy tent and fire out of a tarpaulin, some bent branches and some tin cans. The way he tells it it's Santa's Grotto. Anyway i reckon he'd be a great friend to you if nothing else. He's looking for someone intelligent to talk to to.

Btw, you seem to me to be a mentally strong and quite capable person. It's good to remember one's virtues from time to time, and you seem to have quite a few judging from your post history.

Hi Daniel, I wasn't thinking your post was claptrap just religion in general. I appreciated your answer. Where is the other post?

It's the one that begins "Practical words from a guy"

Practical words from a guy. I hope it helps.
When i was in a similar place, i use the following visualization to get out of it:  I imagined my mind was landscape with one or more old and ruined buildings. My thoughts would dwell in the various broken and decrepit houses, with each house representing a particular station/pattern/system/logic of thoughts. I would imagine all those thoughts in the ruined buildings, and i would set up a campfire (representing the breath, the body, and mindfulness of breathing meditation, or whatever meditation makes you happy) and invite all of the thoughts to site around the campfire and sing campfire songs. Eventually, when all of the thoughts i could see were sitting around the campfire, i would construction of a small shack around the fire, bringing in material from nearby decrepit buildings. Even though the decrepit buildings are much bigger and more complex, they are decrepit, and let the rain in. I disassemble the buildings until they can no-longer be lived in, and use any good material to build this shack, which is now looking more like a cabin. I invite as many thoughts as i can to visit or live in the shack, and i try to keep them there as much as i can. Night after night when i go to meditate i invite the thoughts to my fire/shack/cabin/house and try and keep them there as long as possible, building up the good building and disassembling the larger but broken building where the thoughts had previously been staying. Eventually, i build up a new and happier way of living based on mindfulness of breathing.
(This is really what i did and it really worked for me. Sometimes, not often enough, i come back to it. Sometimes i would do this visualization so hard, i would come out of it sweating.)
I hope that helps you.

Thank you, that is so well written. I can almost picture myself in your situation. I think there is a Buddhist perspective that might help, but first I'll have to state plainly that the pattern you describe is classically the product of early childhood trauma. There's some videos from within the Mindfulness community that address the psychology of this, and it's very new, cutting edge stuff. But first I want to share with you a few things, so you will understand I don't take this at all lightly.
I remember at age 4 or 5 telling myself "I can endure anything" - that's what my childhood was, enduring lots of trauma. I started failing in school early on. Everyone ignored my problem. No one engaged me, it was considered to be all my fault. But the attitude was still the same one directed at me from age 4-5. Nothing had changed. My best friend in junior high school committed suicide. I got involved in drugs naturally later on. My close friend in high school committed suicide. We all had the same basic problem. I struggled through life with this grim mentality, relationships were bad until i met my wife. I was very fortunate, yet even still two more very close friends also took their lives. I wondered what my connection to these guys was, why do my friends all end up this way? Yet I could totally identify with their life stories and their struggles. For whatever reason, i refused to become depressed, i knew i had to endure much. In my case, as it often is, the healing process was possible later in life.
I've practiced Buddhist-sourced meditation almost 20 years now, and i've learned to control these thoughts. I've learned what motivates the people who prey on the weak. Blame and shame tactics, toxic relationships to be sure. I have developed compassionate response to them. They suffer in their own way too. The important thing here is this, I've learned emotional self-defense with a mindfulness approach.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbfuBex-3jE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTZQhCMy3vU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AB51V3fAAvs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQ236szRMD4
more on the channel:
https://www.youtube.com/user/PsychAlive/videos
Dr. Allan Schore
This is for your knowledge, but in your situation I suggest doing what I've done and seek help.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MS6ffDHYGZM - Never Give Up

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/