user17889: Anatman/Anatta says that the 'self'is a momentary flux of Cittas-Vijnanas.There can be no stable permanent Citta,in kshanabhangavada a dharma perishes before its successor arises.one citta arises then perishes and another takes its place all going on until Nirvana is established.However,when one citta perishes,from where and what does the next Citta arise?it cannot be a nothing.but the Citta also cannot preexist as that would be absurd and there would be infinite mes or yous right now somewhere.it would also mean that the world would be Fate.but such a notion is Absurd anyway.it cannot also be that there is an infinite set of predetermined Cittas in a dormant state.as Cittas are all that' Exist' in the Mahayana and Tibetan schools.They cannot be dormant.dormant where?in a concrete external world?if such a receptacle existed wich was permanent and unchanging and not momentary it would be a Self!
Citta can be equated with Vijnana Skandha or alaya vijnana aswell,as the alayavijnana is momentary within Buddhism.
it cannot be that the Citta has the same substance as the former Citta because then it would just be the same Citta and Cittas are not Substantial according to Nagarjuna.
It cannot be that a Citta endures until the next arises because this would confer confused Experience and still the former Citta has no Causal power to create another Citta Exnihilo.
So how does the momentary flux of Cittas work?

user8157: Citta arises from mentality-and-materiality (nama-rupa). As long as the physical body (materiality) is alive, cittas will continue to arise.
Note: citta is of the same substance as consciousness.

Mentality-and-materiality is the cause and condition for the manifestation of the consciousness aggregate. SN 22.82
With the origination of mentality-and-materiality there is the origination of
citta. With the cessation of mentality-and-materiality there is the passing away of
citta. SN 47.42


user19961: By avija (not knowing) and tanha (craving) do saṅkhāras (formation) arise, good householder, does world come to arise. Here a possibility for gatī in another sphere.

user19607: I think the problem is that you're mixing two school of thought, the concept of momentary flux,momentary consciousness, etc has no place in Nagarjuna's teaching or that of Mahayana in general.

user-1: That which is called mind, intellect or consciousness arises as one thing and ceases as another. The conditioned element changes as it persists. The past is one end, the future is the other end, the present is the middle and craving is the seamstress.
The premise of your question is flawed as nowhere in the Sutta is mind explained to be arising and ceasing as one and the same thing before the arising of another.  Such interpretations are wrong and easy to disprove by contradiction.

user43: As I explained in my answer about dharmas, the dharmas (including cittas) are not discrete. There's no distinct "previous" and "next" dharmas. Instead, things morph and stir continuously like clouds - and this includes the thoughts too.

[Nagasena:] ‘Just so, O king, does the continuity of dharmas connect. One emerges, another dissolves, connecting as it were without [a clear boundary between] the previous and the next, thus the former-consciousness and the next-consciousness cannot be categorized as either the same nor as different.’

This invalidates all the points made in your question.

user16635: You might as easily ask where the next wave comes from once a wave has crashed on the beach. The answer is that the wave is not the water. The wave is the result of movement within the water, of various internal flows within the water pushing against each other (including the flow of water out from the last wave as it recedes). In philosophy jargon, a wave is epiphenomenal: it is the outwardly observable expression of some phenomenon we cannot easily observe.
Dharmas are like waves. Cittas are like waves. Thoughts are like waves. Selves are like waves. They are upwellings caused by tangled movements within in the vast ocean of karma. The practice is to untangle and smooth over those deep movements so that the upwellings abate.

user14468: 
OP: Anatman/Anatta says that the 'self'is a momentary flux of Cittas-Vijnanas.

There's a stream of consciousness but it's not self. There's no self at all. That's why the blessed one said, "Sabbe Dhamma Anatta".

OP: There can be no stable permanent Citta.

Yes, it's true. Everything unless Nibbana is impermanent. So is Citta.

OP: In kshanabhangavada a dharma perishes before its successor arises.

Here, if you are asking about the stream of consciousness, it is true according to Teravada Abhidhamma. One Citta perishes before the next arises. How different Dhammas be the causes in different causalities to make an effect is very complex. No single Dhamma arise with a single cause. There are many causes and one Dhamma may be a cause for another Dhamma in different causalities (paccaya). For example two Dhamma can be co-exist being the causes for each other. This is called, Annamanna-paccaya.

OP: One citta arises then perishes and another takes its place all going on until Nirvana is established.

This process permanently ends with Anupadisesa Nibbana. But it can be temporarily stopped  (paused) with Nirodha Samapatti.

OP: However,when one citta perishes,from where and what does the next Citta arise?

This is not a suitable question to ask since "Where" is not applicable for Citta. Citta doesn't acquire space. It's a Nama Dhamma. You can ask "How, When, What, Which" questions about Citta, but not "Where" questions. May I ask you a question, "If you plant a seed in a fertile soil and water it, it will become a plant. From where that plant came from? Was it inside that seed or was it somewhere else?". You may answer, "Don't ask such a question. The plant doesn't come from anywhere. The plant is produced when the conditions are met." Same applies for Citta. If certain conditions satisfied Citta will arise. You can't say where that Citta arise from.

OP: It cannot be that the Citta has the same substance as the former Citta.

Even if the next (or another) Citta has the same mental formations as the present Citta, those two Citta won't be identical. For the ease of learning about Citta, we may classify all the Citta with same mental formations into a same group and give it a common name. But two Citta won't be identical. For example, if we take two Citta in the same stream of consciousness which take the same thing as their object won't be identical. Then how about taking different things as Citta's objects? They are definitely different.
Note: This is how I understood. I may be wrong but not Dhamma.

17889: <p>Anatman/Anatta says that the 'self'is a momentary flux of Cittas-Vijnanas.There can be no stable permanent Citta,in kshanabhangavada a dharma perishes before its successor arises.one citta arises then perishes and another takes its place all going on until Nirvana is established.However,when one citta perishes,from where and what does the next Citta arise?it cannot be a nothing.but the Citta also cannot preexist as that would be absurd and there would be infinite mes or yous right now somewhere.it would also mean that the world would be Fate.but such a notion is Absurd anyway.it cannot also be that there is an infinite set of predetermined Cittas in a dormant state.as Cittas are all that' Exist' in the Mahayana and Tibetan schools.They cannot be dormant.dormant where?in a concrete external world?if such a receptacle existed wich was permanent and unchanging and not momentary it would be a Self!</p>
<p>Citta can be equated with Vijnana Skandha or alaya vijnana aswell,as the alayavijnana is momentary within Buddhism.</p>
<p>it cannot be that the Citta has the same substance as the former Citta because then it would just be the same Citta and Cittas are not Substantial according to Nagarjuna.</p>
<p>It cannot be that a Citta endures until the next arises because this would confer confused Experience and still the former Citta has no Causal power to create another Citta Exnihilo.</p>
<p>So how does the momentary flux of Cittas work?</p>
 8157: <p>Citta arises from mentality-and-materiality (nama-rupa). As long as the physical body (materiality) is alive, cittas will continue to arise.</p>
<p>Note: citta is of the same substance as consciousness.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Mentality-and-materiality is the cause and condition for the manifestation of the consciousness aggregate. SN 22.82</p>
<p>With the origination of mentality-and-materiality there is the origination of
citta. With the cessation of mentality-and-materiality there is the passing away of
citta. SN 47.42</p>
</blockquote>
 19961: <p>By avija (not knowing) and tanha (craving) do saṅkhāras (formation) arise, good householder, does <em>world</em> come to arise. Here a <a href="http://sangham.net/index.php?action=forum" rel="nofollow noreferrer">possibility for gatī in another sphere</a>.</p>
 19607: <p>I think the problem is that you're mixing two school of thought, the concept of momentary flux,momentary consciousness, etc has no place in Nagarjuna's teaching or that of Mahayana in general.</p>
 -1: <p>That which is called mind, intellect or consciousness arises as one thing and ceases as another. The conditioned element changes as it persists. The past is one end, the future is the other end, the present is the middle and craving is the seamstress.</p>
<p>The premise of your question is flawed as nowhere in the Sutta is mind explained to be arising and ceasing as one and the same thing before the arising of another.  Such interpretations are wrong and easy to disprove by contradiction.</p>
 43: <p>As I explained <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/43102/43">in my answer about dharmas</a>, the dharmas (including cittas) are not discrete. There's no distinct &quot;previous&quot; and &quot;next&quot; dharmas. Instead, things morph and stir continuously like clouds - and this includes the thoughts too.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>[Nagasena:] ‘Just so, O king, does the continuity of dharmas connect. One emerges, another dissolves, connecting as it were without [a clear boundary between] the previous and the next, thus the former-consciousness and the next-consciousness cannot be categorized as either the same nor as different.’</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This invalidates all the points made in your question.</p>
 16635: <p>You might as easily ask where the next wave comes from once a wave has crashed on the beach. The answer is that the <em>wave</em> is not the <em>water</em>. The wave is the result of movement within the water, of various internal flows within the water pushing against each other (including the flow of water out from the last wave as it recedes). In philosophy jargon, a wave is <em>epiphenomenal</em>: it is the outwardly observable expression of some phenomenon we cannot easily observe.</p>
<p>Dharmas are like waves. Cittas are like waves. Thoughts are like waves. Selves are like waves. They are upwellings caused by tangled movements within in the vast ocean of karma. The practice is to untangle and smooth over those deep movements so that the upwellings abate.</p>
 14468: <blockquote>
<p>OP: Anatman/Anatta says that the 'self'is a momentary flux of Cittas-Vijnanas.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>There's a stream of consciousness but it's not self. There's no self at all. That's why the blessed one said, &quot;Sabbe Dhamma Anatta&quot;.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>OP: There can be no stable permanent Citta.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Yes, it's true. Everything unless Nibbana is impermanent. So is Citta.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>OP: In kshanabhangavada a dharma perishes before its successor arises.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Here, if you are asking about the stream of consciousness, it is true according to Teravada Abhidhamma. One Citta perishes before the next arises. How different Dhammas be the causes in different causalities to make an effect is very complex. No single Dhamma arise with a single cause. There are many causes and one Dhamma may be a cause for another Dhamma in different causalities (<em>paccaya</em>). For example two Dhamma can be co-exist being the causes for each other. This is called, <em>Annamanna-paccaya</em>.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>OP: One citta arises then perishes and another takes its place all going on until Nirvana is established.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This process permanently ends with <em>Anupadisesa Nibbana</em>. But it can be temporarily stopped  (paused) with <em>Nirodha Samapatti</em>.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>OP: However,when one citta perishes,from where and what does the next Citta arise?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is not a suitable question to ask since &quot;Where&quot; is not applicable for Citta. Citta doesn't acquire space. It's a <em>Nama Dhamma</em>. You can ask &quot;How, When, What, Which&quot; questions about Citta, but not &quot;Where&quot; questions. May I ask you a question, <em>&quot;If you plant a seed in a fertile soil and water it, it will become a plant. From where that plant came from? Was it inside that seed or was it somewhere else?&quot;</em>. You may answer, <em>&quot;Don't ask such a question. The plant doesn't come from anywhere. The plant is produced when the conditions are met.&quot;</em> Same applies for Citta. If certain conditions satisfied Citta will arise. You can't say where that Citta arise from.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>OP: It cannot be that the Citta has the same substance as the former Citta.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Even if the next (or another) Citta has the same mental formations as the present Citta, those two Citta won't be identical. For the ease of learning about Citta, we may classify all the Citta with same mental formations into a same group and give it a common name. But two Citta won't be identical. For example, if we take two Citta in the same stream of consciousness which take the same thing as their object won't be identical. Then how about taking different things as Citta's objects? They are definitely different.</p>
<p><em><strong>Note:</strong> This is how I understood. I may be wrong but not Dhamma.</em></p>
