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?
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’?”.