user5000: Does self end after death?
Please note:
In my question »death« means: the physical processes of brokenness, graying, wrinkling, break up of the aggregates, casting off of the body, interruption in the life faculty which turn the physical body into dust. Materialistic death, physical death, the ending of life death that we see happening every day on television, i.e. death that happens when somebody is killed by pistol, disease, car accident, etc. Death that happens at complete breakup of the physical body. 
And »self« means: grasping (upadana) as »I«, »me« and »mine« to one or more of the five aggregates (physicality, feeling, perception, mental formations and sense consciousness) with craving (tanha). 

user-1: Likewise the "mental" (process, if liking to make such a differenciation, since it requires always both. the is no such as a rupa-process, and a nama-process), "Beginner". It's, if not gained Awakening, an ongoing becoming and decay of nama (mentality) and rupa (item/object/matter), an "endless" process of "self" becoming and decay, caused by craving and ignorance, since a long, long time.
(Becomming of) Atta, (the grasp) does/is not end with the death of what ever body (rupa), from one atta to another atta. Moment for moment, life for life, as long as not see the stream as it is
Timsa
[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpose or other wordily gain.)

user10100: Self is paññatti. It is not grasping. 
Grasping arise to attach/to cling khandha and paññatti, that are grasping's object. But paññatti never arise, so self never begin or end. Similarly, when you dream. The dreaming-mind is real and arising. But it's object never arise and never vanish, just an imagination of mind. So, self is not real.
Furthermore, for aggregates and grasping, in next life, is already taught that still arise until an ignorant and a craving still is not destroyed by arahanta's enlightenment . Because, there is a future-clinging-aggregate, and that clinging will try (kamma-bhava, kamma-becoming) to have (before death=get new thing, after death=rebirth) that future-clinging-aggregate. So in Khandhasutta taught:

"Whatever form — past, future (form-clinging-aggregate), or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near — is clingable, offers sustenance, and is accompanied with mental fermentation: That is called the form clinging-aggregate.

And Paṭiccasamuppāda taught:

From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From 
   clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. 

Furthermore, we choose to be mahāvihāra theravāda buddhist (because we using mahāvihāra's tipitaka) because we want to have anytime and anywhere security by make every possible protection to protect every of your future self from every possible insecure. If you still lazy to protect your self from next life/rebirth (by making sure you [five aggregates] must never arise anymore), you are not mahāvihāra theravāda buddhist practitioner. Also, you never understand throughout the theravāda-tipitaka's concept.

user5000: Self continues after death. Is incorrect.
Self ends after death. Is incorrect.
Both statements are incorrect.
Why are both incorrect?
Firstly, the Buddha said they are both incorrect:

"Then King Pasenadi Kosala went to the bhikkhuni Khema and, on
  arrival, having bowed down to her, sat to one side. As he was sitting
  there he said to her, "Now then, lady, does the Tathagata exist after
  death?"
"That, great king, has not been declared by the Blessed One: 'The
  Tathagata exists after death.'"
"Well then, lady, does the Tathagata not exist after death?"
"Great king, that too has not been declared by the Blessed One: 'The
  Tathagata does not exist after death.'"
"Then does the Tathagata both exist and not exist after death?"
"That has not been declared by the Blessed One: 'The Tathagata both
  exists and does not exist after death.'"
"Well then, does the Tathagata neither exist nor not exist after
  death?"
"That too has not been declared by the Blessed One: 'The Tathagata
  neither exists nor does not exist after death.'""

Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn44/sn44.001.than.html 
Secondly, even Buddhadasa, a venerable teacher who didn't use faith in his Dhamma teachings, never denied nor accepted rebirth, but said that both statements are incorrect: 

"Listen to the Buddhist teaching: there isn’t a person; there isn’t
  anyone to die, to be born, or be reborn; there is only the stream of
  concocting, the concocting of the khandhas(aggregates),
  thedhātus(elements), and the āyatanas(sense media) in accordance with
  the law of nature." 
"To sum up, since olden times there have been two schools: one
  teaching that there is death and then birth, and one that there is
  death but no subsequent birth. Now, which should we choose?"
"Both beliefs, however, are really incorrect, because the fact is that
  there isn’t anyone to be born or to not be born."

Source: http://www.suanmokkh.org/system/books/files/000/000/014/original/Buddhadasa_Bhikkhu_Concerning_Birth.pdf?1462866820 
Thus, to claim that there is self after death, would be in contradiction to Buddhadasa's and Buddhist teachings, because Buddhadasa's and Buddhist teaching teach us "there isn't anyone to die".
On the other hand, to claim there is no self after death, would be again in contradiction to Buddhadasa's and Buddhist teachings, because Buddhadasa's and Buddhist teaching teach us "there isn't anyone to be born".
Thus, both statements "There is self after death" and "There is no self after death" are incorrect.
Now, this was claimed by Buddhadasa, a venerable teacher, an arahat. We should listen to him and study his teachings carefully. He doesn't teach by using faith. He concentrates on this life. He doesn't do that because he believes there is no self after death, quite the opposite, he knows that to claim "there is no self after death" is in contradiction to the Buddhist teachings, thus he doesn't claim it, but rejects it as being incorrect! Furthermore, he also knows that to claim "there is self after death" is again in contradiction to the Buddhist teachings, thus he doesn't claim it, but rejects it as being incorrect!

"however, the true Buddhist message is that there isn’t a
  being or a person, only ever-changing processes of concocting, of
  compounding, with nobody involved in them."

Source: http://www.suanmokkh.org/system/books/files/000/000/014/original/Buddhadasa_Bhikkhu_Concerning_Birth.pdf?1462866820 
The above statement is key.
The above is exactly the purpose of Buddhadasa's and Buddhist teaching. It is to realize anatta. To see. To penetrate deeply into it. 
If this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding, with nobody involved in them" would stop or continue after the annihilation of the physical body, Buddhadasa and other venerable Dhamma teachers would surely teach us so. But we can see that they don't teach us so. They teach us the opposite: to claim that this process stops or continues after the annihilation of the physical body is incorrect. They teach us that both of these views (stops or continues) are incorrect. 
To expound the truth why both views are incorrect, we should investigate it further:

To claim that this process stops after the complete annihilation of the physical body is incorrect. This process doesn't magically stop after the complete annihilation of the physical body. Why it doesn't just stop?

Because there isn't anyone to die. Since there isn't anyone to die, nobody is involved with this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding".  If there really was someone involved with this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding", when that person would be annihiliated, the "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" would stop after that person's annihilation. Since that person would be involved in the "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding", with the annihilation of that person, the "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" would stop. But since there isn't anyone to be annihilated nor there is anyone involved in these "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding", this process can't just magically stop with the annihilation of the physical body. Just think about it: if there isn't anyone involved in this process, then why does this process run?? Nobody is involved in it, so why does it run?? Who/what runs it?! 
If there isn't anyone involved in it, then neither the physical body is involved in it nor anything in the entire universe at all is involved in it! If neither the physicall body is involved in it nor anything in the entire universe at all, that would mean, that if the physical body and everything in the universe is annihilated, this process wouldn't stop!! This "total annihilation" would not affect this process a single bit!

On the other hand, to claim that this process restarts after the complete annihilation of the physical body is again incorrect. This process doesn't magically restart after the complete annihilation of the physical body. Why it doesn't restart?

Because there isn't anyone to be born. Since there isn't anyone to be born, nobody can become involved with this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding".  If there really would be someone involved with this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding", when that person would be created, the "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" would start after that person's creation. Since that person would become involved in the "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding", with the creation of that person, the "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" would start. But since there isn't anyone to be created nor there is anyone involved in these "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding", this process can't just magically restart after the complete annihilation of the physical body. Just think about it: if there isn't anyone involved in this process, then how can this process restart?? Nobody is involved in it, so why did it start?? Who/what started it?
If there isn't anyone involved in it, then neither the physical body is involved in it nor anything in the entire universe at all is involved in it! If neither the physicall body is involved in it nor anything in the entire universe at all, that would mean, that if the physicall body and everything in the universe is annihilated and then recreated, this process wouldn't restart!! This "total annihilation and recreation" would not affect this process a single bit!

On the other hand, to claim that this process continues after the complete annihilation of the physical body is again incorrect. This process doesn't magically continue after the complete annihilation of the physical body. Why it doesn't continue?

Because there isn't anyone involved in these "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding". Since there isn't anyone involved in these "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding", this process can't just magically continue after the complete annihilation of the physical body. Just think about it: if there isn't anyone involved in this process, then why is this process running RIGHT NOW?? Nobody is involved in it, so why is it running?? Who/what is running it? How can it be even running if nobody is involved in it?
Thus, again we come to the conclusion that both statements "There is self after death" and "There is no self after death" are incorrect.
If this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" can't restart (remember, there is nobody involved in these processes), then why these processes started in the first place? If this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" have nobody involved in them (remember, there is nobody involved in these processes), then why these processes keep running? 
These processes started because of craving. An example would be craving for views: "self continues after death" or "self ends after death". Whenever there is craving for views, the wheel of this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" starts turning, which creates potential for suffering. (Please note that "craving for views" is no different than having a belief. A belief is nothing else but "craving for a view")
These processes keep running because of grasping (upadana) as "I", "me" and "mine" to one or more of the five aggregates (physicality, feeling, perception, mental formations and sense consciousness). Example is grasping on a mental formation of views: "self continues after death" or "self ends after death". Whenever grasping arises, the wheel of this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" spins faster, which creates even more potential for suffering. (Please note that "grasping for views" is no different than having a belief. A belief is nothing else but "grasping on a view")
If this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" can't stop (remember, there is nobody involved in these processes), then how can these processes be stopped? 
By realizing anatta. Once anatta is realized, you let go of all beliefs. Whenever all beliefs cease, the wheel of this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" stops turning, which creates no potential for suffering:

"...'after death a Tathagata exists'...
"...'after death a Tathagata does not exist'...
"...'after death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist'...
"...'after death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist'...
  does not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation; to calm,
  direct knowledge, full Awakening, Unbinding."
"Does Master Gotama have any position at all?"
"A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata has done away
  with. What a Tathagata sees is this: 'Such is form, such its
  origination, such its disappearance; such is feeling, such its
  origination, such its disappearance; such is perception...such are
  fabrications...such is consciousness, such its origination, such its
  disappearance.' Because of this, I say, a Tathagata — with the ending,
  fading away, cessation, renunciation, & relinquishment of all
  construings, all excogitations, all I-making & mine-making &
  obsessions with conceit — is, through lack of clinging/sustenance,
  released."

Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.072.than.html 
In order for us to let go of all beliefs, we need wisdom. Buddhadasa's and Buddhist teachings lead us on the path towards wisdom. They cannot magically transfer their wisdom into our minds, but can show us the path how to acquire it by ourselves.
Their teachings are not to teach us "there is no experience of life after death" nor to teach us "there is experience of life after death" ... because all of these beliefs are incorrect as they are coming from craving ... grasping to "Me", "Mine", "I" (both beliefs are self views). Nor to teach us "there is nothing after death" or to teach us "there is something after death" ... because all of these beliefs are incorrect as they are coming from craving ... grasping to "Me", "Mine", "I" (all beliefs are self views). It's to teach us that all these beliefs should be left behind, laid to the ground until turned into dust and vanished:

"Because of the cessation of views, monk, uncertainty doesn't arise in
  an instructed disciple of the noble ones over the undeclared issues.
  The view-standpoint, 'The Tathagata exists after death,' the
  view-standpoint, 'The Tathagata doesn't exist after death,' the
  view-standpoint, 'The Tathagata both does and doesn't exist after
  death,' the view-standpoint, 'The Tathagata neither does nor doesn't
  exist after death': The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't
  discern view, doesn't discern the origination of view, doesn't discern
  the cessation of view, doesn't discern the path of practice leading to
  the cessation of view, and so for him that view grows. He is not freed
  from birth, aging, & death; from sorrows, lamentations, pains,
  distresses, and despairs. He is not freed, I tell you, from suffering
  & stress. But the instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns view,
  discerns the origination of view, discerns the cessation of view,
  discerns the path of practice leading to the cessation of view, and so
  for him that view ceases. He is freed from birth, aging, & death; from
  sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, and despairs. He is freed, I
  tell you, from suffering & stress."

Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an07/an07.051.than.html
Further suttas that claim that all views should be abandoned:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.072.than.html
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.063.than.html
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.093.than.html
Once all beliefs are left behind, the wheel of "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" will stop turning and there will be no more potential for suffering, thus suffering will end.
There's nothing wrong having beliefs. On the contrary, it's normal and healthy. But we should come to the understanding that they don't lead us to the cessation of suffering.
I'll add some reflections that I made on this subject:
For the purpose of this explanation I'll replace the term "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" with the term Dhamma.
Beliefs in self and soul should be abandoned

"...'after death a Tathagata exists'...
"...'after death a Tathagata does not exist'...
"...'after death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist'...
"...'after death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist'...
  does not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation; to calm,
  direct knowledge, full Awakening, Unbinding."

Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.072.than.html 
Whoever holds the belief that this Dhamma stops after the annihilation of the physical body, holds this belief because he believes that his self is in the physical body ... because how else could this Dhamma stop after the annihilation of the physical body, if it wasn't because his self is in the physical body? 
Whoever says "Dhamma stops after the annihilation of the physical body" holds this view because he believes his self is involved in the Dhamma. How can his self be involved in the Dhamma, if everything is not self? If everything is not self, his self cannot be involved in the Dhamma. If everything is not self, his self can't be involved in anything.
Whoever holds the belief that this Dhamma continues after the annihilation of the physical body, holds this belief because he believes that his self transcends the physical body ... because how else could this Dhamma continue after the annihilation of the physical body, if it wasn't because his self is transcends the physical body? 
Whoever says "Dhamma continues after the annihilation of the physical body" holds this view because he believes his self is involved in the Dhamma. How can his self be involved in the Dhamma, if everything is not self? If everything is not self, his self cannot be involved in the Dhamma. If everything is not self, his self can't be involved in anything.
Whoever holds the belief that this Dhamma continues after the annihilation of the physical body, holds this belief because he believes that his self continues after the annihilation of the physical body ... because how else could this Dhamma continue after the annihilation of the physical body, if it wasn't because his self continues after the annihilation of the physical body? 
Whoever says "Dhamma continues after the annihilation of the physical body" holds this view because he believes his self transmigrates from body to body. How can his self transmigrate, if everything is not self? If everything is not self, his self cannot transmigrate. If everything is not self, his self cannot transmigrate after the annihilation of the physical body.
Beliefs in material existence and material non-existence should be abandoned

"By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its
  object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one
  sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right
  discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not
  occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually
  is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world
  does not occur to one."
"'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist':
  That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata
  teaches the Dhamma via the middle

Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.015.than.html 
Whoever says "Dhamma continues after the annihilation of the physical body" holds this view because he believes that "something" that exists is involved in the Dhamma. How can "something" be involved in the Dhamma, if nothing exists that can be involved in the Dhamma? If nothing exists that can be involved in the Dhamma, "something" cannot be involved in the Dhamma.
Whoever says "Dhamma stops after the annihilation of the physical body" holds this view because he believes that "nothing" that is involved in the Dhamma exists. How can "nothing" be involved in the Dhamma, if something exists that is involved in the Dhamma? If something exists that is involved in the Dhamma, "something" must be involved in the Dhamma.
Whoever says "Dhamma stops after the annihilation of the physical body" holds this view because he believes that "nothing" that is involved in the Dhamma exists. How can "nothing" be involved in the Dhamma, if Dhamma is existent? If Dhamma is existent, "nothing" cannot be involved in the Dhamma, but "something" must be involved in it. If Dhamma is existent, something that does not exist must exist, thus it must be involved in the Dhamma.
Beliefs in eternalism should be abandoned

"As he attends inappropriately in this way, one of six kinds of view
  arises in him: The view I have a self arises in him as true &
  established, or the view I have no self... or the view It is precisely
  by means of self that I perceive self... or the view It is precisely
  by means of self that I perceive not-self... or the view It is
  precisely by means of not-self that I perceive self arises in him as
  true & established, or else he has a view like this: This very self of
  mine — the knower that is sensitive here & there to the ripening of
  good & bad actions — is the self of mine that is constant,
  everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and will stay just as it
  is for eternity. This is called a thicket of views, a wilderness of
  views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views.
  Bound by a fetter of views, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is
  not freed from birth, aging, & death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain,
  distress, & despair. He is not freed, I tell you, from suffering &
  stress.

Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.than.html 
Whoever holds the belief that this Dhamma continues after the annihilation of the physical body, holds this belief because he believes that his self continues after the annihilation of the physical body ... because how else could this Dhamma continue after the annihilation of the physical body, if it wasn't because his self continuing after the annihilation of the physical body? 
Whoever says "Dhamma continues after the annihilation of the physical body" holds this view because he believes his self exists and transmigrates from Dhamma to Dhamma. How can his self transmigrate, if everything is not self? If everything is not self, his self cannot transmigrate. If everything is not self, there is no self that can transmigrate.
Beliefs in nihilism should be abandoned

"Bhikkhus, held by two kinds of views, some devas and human beings
  hold back and some overreach; only those with vision see.
"How, bhikkhus, do some overreach? Now some are troubled, ashamed, and
  disgusted by this very same being and they rejoice in (the idea of)
  non-being, asserting: 'In as much as this self, good sirs, when the
  body perishes at death, is annihilated and destroyed and does not
  exist after death — this is peaceful, this is excellent, this is
  reality!' Thus, bhikkhus, do some overreach.

Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/iti/iti.2.042-049x.irel.html#iti-049 

"Because there actually is the next world, the view of one who thinks,
  'There is no next world' is his wrong view. Because there actually is
  the next world, when he is resolved that 'There is no next world,'
  that is his wrong resolve. Because there actually is the next world,
  when he speaks the statement, 'There is no next world,' that is his
  wrong speech. Because there actually is the next world, when he says
  that 'There is no next world,' he makes himself an opponent to those
  arahants who know the next world. Because there actually is the next
  world, when he persuades another that 'There is no next world,' that
  is persuasion in what is not true Dhamma. And in that persuasion in
  what is not true Dhamma, he exalts himself and disparages others.
  Whatever good habituation he previously had is abandoned, while bad
  habituation is manifested. And this wrong view, wrong resolve, wrong
  speech, opposition to the arahants, persuasion in what is not true
  Dhamma, exaltation of self, & disparagement of others: These many
  evil, unskillful activities come into play, in dependence on wrong
  view.

Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.060.than.html 

"Herein, bhikkhus, a certain recluse or a brahmin asserts the
  following doctrine and view: 'The self, good sir, has material form;
  it is composed of the four primary elements and originates from father
  and mother. Since this self, good sir, is annihilated and destroyed
  with the breakup of the body and does not exist after death, at this
  point the self is completely annihilated.' In this way some proclaim
  the annihilation, destruction, and extermination of an existent being.
"This, bhikkhus, the Tathāgata understands. And he understands: 'These
  standpoints, thus assumed and thus misapprehended, lead to such a
  future destination, to such a state in the world beyond.' He
  understands as well what transcends this, yet even that understanding
  he does not misapprehend.

Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.01.0.bodh.html 
Wisdom
Dhamma neither stops after death nor continues. Life neither exists nor not exists. Death neither exists nor not exists. Birth neither exists nor not exists. Self neither exists nor not exists. Soul neither exists nor not exists.
Dhamma is suffering.
When the conditions are present, Dhamma arises.
When the conditions persist, Dhamma continues.
When the conditions are removed, Dhamma stops.
What are the conditions?
It's the lack of wisdom (mainly lack of anatta) (avijja) giving raise to craving (tanha) giving fuel to 'clinging, attachment' (upadana) giving raise to fabrications (samkhara) giving raise to the aggregates (khandhas) giving raise to atta, soul, eternalism, nihilism, views, beliefs, etc. 
All of the above is Dhamma.
All is Dhamma.
All the Dhamma arises simultaneously, like a burning fire.
Whoever fully realized Dhamma will never deny the continuation of self after death:

"Because there actually is the next world, the view of one who thinks,
  'There is a next world' is his right view. Because there actually is
  the next world, when he is resolved that 'There is a next world,' that
  is his right resolve. Because there actually is the next world, when
  he speaks the statement, 'There is a next world,' that is his right
  speech. Because there actually is the next world, when he says that
  'There is a next world,' he doesn't make himself an opponent to those
  arahants who know the next world. Because there actually is the next
  world, when he persuades another that 'There is a next world,' that is
  persuasion in what is true Dhamma. And in that persuasion in what is
  true Dhamma, he doesn't exalt himself or disparage others. Whatever
  bad habituation he previously had is abandoned, while good habituation
  is manifested. And this right view, right resolve, right speech,
  non-opposition to the arahants, persuasion in what is true Dhamma,
  non-exaltation of self, & non-disparagement of others: These many
  skillful activities come into play, in dependence on right view.

Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.060.than.html 
Whoever fully realized Dhamma will never deny the end of self after death:

"From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From
  fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From
  consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From
  name-&-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From
  the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From
  contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a
  requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite
  condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a
  requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite
  condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging
  & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into
  play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress &
  suffering.

Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.015.than.html 
A wise person will never accept the end of self after death:

"With regard to this, a wise person considers thus: 'If there is no
  other world, then — at the break-up of the body, after death — this
  venerable person has made himself safe. But if there is the other
  world, then this venerable person — on the break-up of the body, after
  death — will reappear in the plane of deprivation, the bad
  destination, the lower realms, in hell. Even if we didn't speak of the
  other world and there weren't the true statement of those venerable
  brahmans & contemplatives, this venerable person is still criticized
  in the here-&-now by the wise as a person of bad habits & wrong view:
  one who holds to a doctrine of non-existence (natthikavādo) . If there
  really is an other world, then this venerable person has made a bad
  throw twice: in that he is criticized by the wise here-&-now, and in
  that — with the break-up of the body, after death — he will reappear
  in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in
  hell. Thus this safe-bet teaching, when poorly grasped & poorly
  adopted by him, covers (only) one side and leaves behind the
  possibility of the skillful.

Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.060.than.html 
Whoever fully realized Dhamma will never deny nor accept anything. He will always stay in the middle. 
When verbally denying something, in reality he would not be denying it nor accepting it. When verbally accepting something, in reality he would not be accepting it nor denying it. He would always stay in the middle. 

user471: In the Dhammapada 153-154, we find the Buddha exclaiming:

Through the round of many births I roamed
  without reward,
  without rest,
  seeking the house-builder.
  Painful is birth
  again & again.
House-builder, you're seen!
  You will not build a house again.
  All your rafters broken,
  the ridge pole dismantled,
  immersed in dismantling, the mind
  has attained to the end of craving. 

The commentary on these verses by Ven. Thanissaro states:

DhpA: These verses were the Buddha's first utterance after his full
  Awakening. For some reason, they are not reported in any of the other
  canonical accounts of the events following on the Awakening.
DhpA: "House" = selfhood; house-builder = craving. "House" may also
  refer to the nine abodes of beings — the seven stations of
  consciousness and two spheres (see Khp 4 and DN 15).
The word anibbisam in 153 can be read either as the negative gerund of
  nibbisati ("earning, gaining a reward") or as the negative gerund of
  nivisati, altered to fit the meter, meaning "coming to a rest,
  settled, situated." Both readings make sense in the context of the
  verse, so the word is probably intended to have a double meaning:
  without reward, without rest.

The commentary by Acharya Buddharakkhita states:

According to the commentary, these verses are the Buddha's "Song of
  Victory," his first utterance after his Enlightenment. The house is
  individualized existence in samsara, the house-builder craving, the
  rafters the passions and the ridge-pole ignorance.

I interpret this as saying that the self ("house") is deconstructed at death, but reconstructed again in the following birth, due to craving ("house-builder"), according to dependent origination.
So, the answer to your question would be "yes, it ends, but then it arises again".

Apparently, this question was asked with the skeptical view on whether rebirth truly exists or not.
I think this reference from the DN2 should lay our doubts to rest:

"With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished,
  free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to
  imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to knowledge of the
  recollection of past lives (lit: previous homes). He recollects his
  manifold past lives, i.e., one birth, two births, three births, four,
  five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, one hundred, one thousand,
  one hundred thousand, many aeons of cosmic contraction, many aeons of
  cosmic expansion, many aeons of cosmic contraction and expansion,
  [recollecting], 'There I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had
  such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure
  and pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I
  re-arose there. There too I had such a name, belonged to such a clan,
  had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of
  pleasure and pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that
  state, I re-arose here.' Thus he recollects his manifold past lives in
  their modes and details. Just as if a man were to go from his home
  village to another village, and then from that village to yet another
  village, and then from that village back to his home village. The
  thought would occur to him, 'I went from my home village to that
  village over there. There I stood in such a way, sat in such a way,
  talked in such a way, and remained silent in such a way. From that
  village I went to that village over there, and there I stood in such a
  way, sat in such a way, talked in such a way, and remained silent in
  such a way. From that village I came back home.' In the same way —
  with his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished,
  free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to
  imperturbability — the monk directs and inclines it to knowledge of
  the recollection of past lives. He recollects his manifold past
  lives... in their modes and details.


5000: <p>Does self end after death?</p>

<p>Please note:</p>

<p>In my question »death« means: the physical processes of brokenness, graying, wrinkling, break up of the aggregates, casting off of the body, interruption in the life faculty which turn the physical body into dust. Materialistic death, physical death, the ending of life death that we see happening every day on television, i.e. death that happens when somebody is killed by pistol, disease, car accident, etc. Death that happens at complete breakup of the physical body. </p>

<p>And »self« means: grasping (upadana) as »I«, »me« and »mine« to one or more of the five aggregates (physicality, feeling, perception, mental formations and sense consciousness) with craving (tanha). </p>
 -1: <p>Likewise the "mental" (process, if liking to make such a differenciation, since it requires always both. the is no such as a rupa-process, and a nama-process), "Beginner". It's, if not gained Awakening, an ongoing becoming and decay of nama (mentality) and rupa (item/object/matter), an "endless" process of "self" becoming and decay, caused by craving and ignorance, since a long, long time.</p>

<p>(Becomming of) Atta, (the grasp) does/is not <em>end</em> with the death of what ever body (rupa), from one atta to another atta. Moment for moment, life for life, as long as not see the stream as it <em>is</em></p>

<p><a href="http://www.zugangzureinsicht.org/html/tipitaka/sn/sn15/sn15.013.than_en.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Timsa</a></p>

<p><em>[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpose or other wordily gain.)</em></p>
 10100: <p><strong>Self is <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/22761/10100">paññatti</a>. It is not grasping.</strong> </p>

<p>Grasping arise to attach/to cling khandha and paññatti, that are grasping's object. But paññatti never arise, so self never begin or end. Similarly, when you dream. The dreaming-mind is real and arising. But it's object never arise and never vanish, just an imagination of mind. So, self is not real.</p>

<p>Furthermore, for aggregates and grasping, in next life, is already taught that still arise until an ignorant and a craving still is not destroyed by arahanta's enlightenment . Because, there is a <strong>future-clinging</strong>-aggregate, <strong>and that clinging will try</strong> (kamma-bhava, kamma-becoming) <strong>to have</strong> (before death=get new thing, after death=rebirth) <strong>that future-clinging-aggregate</strong>. So in <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.048.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Khandhasutta</a> taught:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"Whatever form — past, <strong>future (form-clinging-aggregate)</strong>, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near — is clingable, offers sustenance, and is accompanied with mental fermentation: That is called the form clinging-aggregate.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>And <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.002.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Paṭiccasamuppāda</a> taught:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>From craving as a requisite condition comes <strong>clinging</strong>/sustenance. From 
   clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes <strong>becoming</strong>. From becoming as a requisite condition comes <strong>birth</strong>. </p>
</blockquote>

<p>Furthermore, we choose to be <strong>mahāvihāra theravāda buddhist</strong> (because we using mahāvihāra's tipitaka) because we want to have anytime and anywhere security by make every possible protection to protect every of your future self from every possible insecure. <strong>If you still lazy to protect your self from next life/rebirth</strong> (by making sure you [five aggregates] must never arise anymore), <strong>you are not mahāvihāra theravāda buddhist practitioner. Also, you <em>never</em> understand throughout the <a href="http://unmixedtheravada.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">theravāda-tipitaka's concept</a>.</strong></p>
 5000: <p><strong>Self continues after death. Is incorrect.</strong></p>

<p><strong>Self ends after death. Is incorrect.</strong></p>

<p><strong>Both statements are incorrect.</strong></p>

<p>Why are both incorrect?</p>

<p>Firstly, the Buddha said they are both incorrect:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"Then King Pasenadi Kosala went to the bhikkhuni Khema and, on
  arrival, having bowed down to her, sat to one side. As he was sitting
  there he said to her, "Now then, lady, does the Tathagata exist after
  death?"</p>
  
  <p><strong>"That, great king, has not been declared by the Blessed One: 'The
  Tathagata exists after death.'"</strong></p>
  
  <p>"Well then, lady, does the Tathagata not exist after death?"</p>
  
  <p><strong>"Great king, that too has not been declared by the Blessed One: 'The
  Tathagata does not exist after death.'"</strong></p>
  
  <p>"Then does the Tathagata both exist and not exist after death?"</p>
  
  <p>"That has not been declared by the Blessed One: 'The Tathagata both
  exists and does not exist after death.'"</p>
  
  <p>"Well then, does the Tathagata neither exist nor not exist after
  death?"</p>
  
  <p>"That too has not been declared by the Blessed One: 'The Tathagata
  neither exists nor does not exist after death.'""</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Source: <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn44/sn44.001.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn44/sn44.001.than.html</a> </p>

<p>Secondly, even Buddhadasa, a venerable teacher who didn't use faith in his Dhamma teachings, never denied nor accepted rebirth, but said that both statements are incorrect: </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"Listen to the Buddhist teaching: there isn’t a person; there isn’t
  anyone to die, to be born, or be reborn; there is only the stream of
  concocting, the concocting of the khandhas(aggregates),
  thedhātus(elements), and the āyatanas(sense media) in accordance with
  the law of nature." </p>
  
  <p><strong>"To sum up, since olden times there have been two schools: one
  teaching that there is death and then birth, and one that there is
  death but no subsequent birth. Now, which should we choose?"</strong></p>
  
  <p><strong>"Both beliefs, however, are really incorrect, because the fact is that
  there isn’t anyone to be born or to not be born."</strong></p>
</blockquote>

<p>Source: <a href="http://www.suanmokkh.org/system/books/files/000/000/014/original/Buddhadasa_Bhikkhu_Concerning_Birth.pdf?1462866820" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.suanmokkh.org/system/books/files/000/000/014/original/Buddhadasa_Bhikkhu_Concerning_Birth.pdf?1462866820</a> </p>

<p>Thus, to claim that there is self after death, would be in contradiction to Buddhadasa's and Buddhist teachings, because Buddhadasa's and Buddhist teaching teach us "there isn't anyone to die".</p>

<p>On the other hand, to claim there is no self after death, would be again in contradiction to Buddhadasa's and Buddhist teachings, because Buddhadasa's and Buddhist teaching teach us "there isn't anyone to be born".</p>

<p>Thus, both statements "There is self after death" and "There is no self after death" are incorrect.</p>

<p>Now, this was claimed by Buddhadasa, a venerable teacher, an arahat. We should listen to him and study his teachings carefully. He doesn't teach by using faith. He concentrates on this life. He doesn't do that because he believes there is no self after death, quite the opposite, he knows that to claim "there is no self after death" is in contradiction to the Buddhist teachings, thus he doesn't claim it, but rejects it as being incorrect! Furthermore, he also knows that to claim "there is self after death" is again in contradiction to the Buddhist teachings, thus he doesn't claim it, but rejects it as being incorrect!</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"<strong>however, the true Buddhist message is that there isn’t a
  being or a person, only ever-changing processes of concocting, of
  compounding, with nobody involved in them.</strong>"</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Source: <a href="http://www.suanmokkh.org/system/books/files/000/000/014/original/Buddhadasa_Bhikkhu_Concerning_Birth.pdf?1462866820" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.suanmokkh.org/system/books/files/000/000/014/original/Buddhadasa_Bhikkhu_Concerning_Birth.pdf?1462866820</a> </p>

<p>The above statement is key.</p>

<p>The above is exactly the purpose of Buddhadasa's and Buddhist teaching. It is to realize anatta. To see. To penetrate deeply into it. </p>

<p>If this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding, with nobody involved in them" would stop or continue after the annihilation of the physical body, Buddhadasa and other venerable Dhamma teachers would surely teach us so. But we can see that they don't teach us so. They teach us the opposite: to claim that this process stops or continues after the annihilation of the physical body is incorrect. They teach us that both of these views (stops or continues) are incorrect. </p>

<p>To expound the truth why both views are incorrect, we should investigate it further:</p>

<ol>
<li>To claim that this process stops after the complete annihilation of the physical body is incorrect. This process doesn't magically stop after the complete annihilation of the physical body. Why it doesn't just stop?</li>
</ol>

<p>Because there isn't anyone to die. Since there isn't anyone to die, nobody is involved with this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding".  If there really was someone involved with this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding", when that person would be annihiliated, the "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" would stop after that person's annihilation. Since that person would be involved in the "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding", with the annihilation of that person, the "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" would stop. But since there isn't anyone to be annihilated nor there is anyone involved in these "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding", this process can't just magically stop with the annihilation of the physical body. Just think about it: if there isn't anyone involved in this process, then why does this process run?? Nobody is involved in it, so why does it run?? Who/what runs it?! </p>

<p>If there isn't anyone involved in it, then neither the physical body is involved in it nor anything in the entire universe at all is involved in it! If neither the physicall body is involved in it nor anything in the entire universe at all, that would mean, that if the physical body and everything in the universe is annihilated, this process wouldn't stop!! This "total annihilation" would not affect this process a single bit!</p>

<ol start="2">
<li>On the other hand, to claim that this process restarts after the complete annihilation of the physical body is again incorrect. This process doesn't magically restart after the complete annihilation of the physical body. Why it doesn't restart?</li>
</ol>

<p>Because there isn't anyone to be born. Since there isn't anyone to be born, nobody can become involved with this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding".  If there really would be someone involved with this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding", when that person would be created, the "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" would start after that person's creation. Since that person would become involved in the "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding", with the creation of that person, the "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" would start. But since there isn't anyone to be created nor there is anyone involved in these "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding", this process can't just magically restart after the complete annihilation of the physical body. Just think about it: if there isn't anyone involved in this process, then how can this process restart?? Nobody is involved in it, so why did it start?? Who/what started it?</p>

<p>If there isn't anyone involved in it, then neither the physical body is involved in it nor anything in the entire universe at all is involved in it! If neither the physicall body is involved in it nor anything in the entire universe at all, that would mean, that if the physicall body and everything in the universe is annihilated and then recreated, this process wouldn't restart!! This "total annihilation and recreation" would not affect this process a single bit!</p>

<ol start="3">
<li>On the other hand, to claim that this process continues after the complete annihilation of the physical body is again incorrect. This process doesn't magically continue after the complete annihilation of the physical body. Why it doesn't continue?</li>
</ol>

<p>Because there isn't anyone involved in these "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding". Since there isn't anyone involved in these "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding", this process can't just magically continue after the complete annihilation of the physical body. Just think about it: if there isn't anyone involved in this process, then why is this process running RIGHT NOW?? Nobody is involved in it, so why is it running?? Who/what is running it? How can it be even running if nobody is involved in it?</p>

<p>Thus, again we come to the conclusion that both statements "There is self after death" and "There is no self after death" are incorrect.</p>

<p>If this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" can't restart (remember, there is nobody involved in these processes), then why these processes started in the first place? If this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" have nobody involved in them (remember, there is nobody involved in these processes), then why these processes keep running? </p>

<p>These processes started because of craving. An example would be craving for views: "self continues after death" or "self ends after death". Whenever there is craving for views, the wheel of this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" starts turning, which creates potential for suffering. (Please note that "craving for views" is no different than having a belief. A belief is nothing else but "craving for a view")</p>

<p>These processes keep running because of grasping (upadana) as "I", "me" and "mine" to one or more of the five aggregates (physicality, feeling, perception, mental formations and sense consciousness). Example is grasping on a mental formation of views: "self continues after death" or "self ends after death". Whenever grasping arises, the wheel of this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" spins faster, which creates even more potential for suffering. (Please note that "grasping for views" is no different than having a belief. A belief is nothing else but "grasping on a view")</p>

<p>If this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" can't stop (remember, there is nobody involved in these processes), then how can these processes be stopped? </p>

<p>By realizing anatta. Once anatta is realized, you let go of all beliefs. Whenever all beliefs cease, the wheel of this "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" stops turning, which creates no potential for suffering:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"...'after death a Tathagata exists'...</p>
  
  <p>"...'after death a Tathagata does not exist'...</p>
  
  <p>"...'after death a Tathagata both exists &amp; does not exist'...</p>
  
  <p>"...'after death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist'...
  does not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation; to calm,
  direct knowledge, full Awakening, Unbinding."</p>
  
  <p><strong>"Does Master Gotama have any position at all?"</strong></p>
  
  <p>"<strong>A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata has done away
  with.</strong> What a Tathagata sees is this: 'Such is form, such its
  origination, such its disappearance; such is feeling, such its
  origination, such its disappearance; such is perception...such are
  fabrications...such is consciousness, such its origination, such its
  disappearance.' Because of this, I say, a Tathagata — with the ending,
  fading away, cessation, renunciation, &amp; relinquishment of all
  construings, all excogitations, all I-making &amp; mine-making &amp;
  obsessions with conceit — is, through lack of clinging/sustenance,
  released."</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Source: <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.072.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.072.than.html</a> </p>

<p>In order for us to let go of all beliefs, we need wisdom. Buddhadasa's and Buddhist teachings lead us on the path towards wisdom. They cannot magically transfer their wisdom into our minds, but can show us the path how to acquire it by ourselves.</p>

<p>Their teachings are not to teach us "there is no experience of life after death" nor to teach us "there is experience of life after death" ... because all of these beliefs are incorrect as they are coming from craving ... grasping to "Me", "Mine", "I" (both beliefs are self views). Nor to teach us "there is nothing after death" or to teach us "there is something after death" ... because all of these beliefs are incorrect as they are coming from craving ... grasping to "Me", "Mine", "I" (all beliefs are self views). It's to teach us that all these beliefs should be left behind, laid to the ground until turned into dust and vanished:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"<strong>Because of the cessation of views, monk, uncertainty doesn't arise in
  an instructed disciple of the noble ones over the undeclared issues.</strong>
  The view-standpoint, 'The Tathagata exists after death,' the
  view-standpoint, 'The Tathagata doesn't exist after death,' the
  view-standpoint, 'The Tathagata both does and doesn't exist after
  death,' the view-standpoint, 'The Tathagata neither does nor doesn't
  exist after death': The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't
  discern view, doesn't discern the origination of view, doesn't discern
  the cessation of view, doesn't discern the path of practice leading to
  the cessation of view, and so for him that view grows. He is not freed
  from birth, aging, &amp; death; from sorrows, lamentations, pains,
  distresses, and despairs. He is not freed, I tell you, from suffering
  &amp; stress. But the instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns view,
  discerns the origination of view, discerns the cessation of view,
  discerns the path of practice leading to the cessation of view, and so
  for him that view ceases. He is freed from birth, aging, &amp; death; from
  sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, and despairs. He is freed, I
  tell you, from suffering &amp; stress."</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Source: <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an07/an07.051.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an07/an07.051.than.html</a></p>

<p>Further suttas that claim that all views should be abandoned:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.072.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.072.than.html</a></p>

<p><a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.063.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.063.than.html</a></p>

<p><a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.093.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.093.than.html</a></p>

<p>Once all beliefs are left behind, the wheel of "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" will stop turning and there will be no more potential for suffering, thus suffering will end.</p>

<p>There's nothing wrong having beliefs. On the contrary, it's normal and healthy. But we should come to the understanding that they don't lead us to the cessation of suffering.</p>

<p>I'll add some reflections that I made on this subject:</p>

<p>For the purpose of this explanation I'll replace the term "ever-changing processes of concocting, of compounding" with the term Dhamma.</p>

<p><strong>Beliefs in self and soul should be abandoned</strong></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"...'after death a Tathagata exists'...</p>
  
  <p>"...'after death a Tathagata does not exist'...</p>
  
  <p>"...'after death a Tathagata both exists &amp; does not exist'...</p>
  
  <p>"...'after death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist'...
  does not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation; to calm,
  direct knowledge, full Awakening, Unbinding."</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Source: <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.072.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.072.than.html</a> </p>

<p>Whoever holds the belief that this Dhamma stops after the annihilation of the physical body, holds this belief because he believes that his self is in the physical body ... because how else could this Dhamma stop after the annihilation of the physical body, if it wasn't because his self is in the physical body? </p>

<p>Whoever says "Dhamma stops after the annihilation of the physical body" holds this view because he believes his self is involved in the Dhamma. How can his self be involved in the Dhamma, if everything is not self? If everything is not self, his self cannot be involved in the Dhamma. If everything is not self, his self can't be involved in anything.</p>

<p>Whoever holds the belief that this Dhamma continues after the annihilation of the physical body, holds this belief because he believes that his self transcends the physical body ... because how else could this Dhamma continue after the annihilation of the physical body, if it wasn't because his self is transcends the physical body? </p>

<p>Whoever says "Dhamma continues after the annihilation of the physical body" holds this view because he believes his self is involved in the Dhamma. How can his self be involved in the Dhamma, if everything is not self? If everything is not self, his self cannot be involved in the Dhamma. If everything is not self, his self can't be involved in anything.</p>

<p>Whoever holds the belief that this Dhamma continues after the annihilation of the physical body, holds this belief because he believes that his self continues after the annihilation of the physical body ... because how else could this Dhamma continue after the annihilation of the physical body, if it wasn't because his self continues after the annihilation of the physical body? </p>

<p>Whoever says "Dhamma continues after the annihilation of the physical body" holds this view because he believes his self transmigrates from body to body. How can his self transmigrate, if everything is not self? If everything is not self, his self cannot transmigrate. If everything is not self, his self cannot transmigrate after the annihilation of the physical body.</p>

<p><strong>Beliefs in material existence and material non-existence should be abandoned</strong></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"By &amp; large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its
  object) a polarity, that of existence &amp; non-existence. But when one
  sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right
  discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not
  occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually
  is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world
  does not occur to one."</p>
  
  <p>"<strong>'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist':
  That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata
  teaches the Dhamma via the middle</strong></p>
</blockquote>

<p>Source: <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.015.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.015.than.html</a> </p>

<p>Whoever says "Dhamma continues after the annihilation of the physical body" holds this view because he believes that "something" that exists is involved in the Dhamma. How can "something" be involved in the Dhamma, if nothing exists that can be involved in the Dhamma? If nothing exists that can be involved in the Dhamma, "something" cannot be involved in the Dhamma.</p>

<p>Whoever says "Dhamma stops after the annihilation of the physical body" holds this view because he believes that "nothing" that is involved in the Dhamma exists. How can "nothing" be involved in the Dhamma, if something exists that is involved in the Dhamma? If something exists that is involved in the Dhamma, "something" must be involved in the Dhamma.</p>

<p>Whoever says "Dhamma stops after the annihilation of the physical body" holds this view because he believes that "nothing" that is involved in the Dhamma exists. How can "nothing" be involved in the Dhamma, if Dhamma is existent? If Dhamma is existent, "nothing" cannot be involved in the Dhamma, but "something" must be involved in it. If Dhamma is existent, something that does not exist must exist, thus it must be involved in the Dhamma.</p>

<p><strong>Beliefs in eternalism should be abandoned</strong></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"As he attends inappropriately in this way, one of six kinds of view
  arises in him: The view I have a self arises in him as true &amp;
  established, or the view I have no self... or the view It is precisely
  by means of self that I perceive self... or the view It is precisely
  by means of self that I perceive not-self... or the view It is
  precisely by means of not-self that I perceive self arises in him as
  true &amp; established, or else he has a view like this: <strong>This very self of
  mine — the knower that is sensitive here &amp; there to the ripening of
  good &amp; bad actions — is the self of mine that is constant,
  everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and will stay just as it
  is for eternity. This is called a thicket of views, a wilderness of
  views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views.</strong>
  Bound by a fetter of views, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is
  not freed from birth, aging, &amp; death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain,
  distress, &amp; despair. He is not freed, I tell you, from suffering &amp;
  stress.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Source: <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.than.html</a> </p>

<p>Whoever holds the belief that this Dhamma continues after the annihilation of the physical body, holds this belief because he believes that his self continues after the annihilation of the physical body ... because how else could this Dhamma continue after the annihilation of the physical body, if it wasn't because his self continuing after the annihilation of the physical body? </p>

<p>Whoever says "Dhamma continues after the annihilation of the physical body" holds this view because he believes his self exists and transmigrates from Dhamma to Dhamma. How can his self transmigrate, if everything is not self? If everything is not self, his self cannot transmigrate. If everything is not self, there is no self that can transmigrate.</p>

<p><strong>Beliefs in nihilism should be abandoned</strong></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"Bhikkhus, held by two kinds of views, some devas and human beings
  hold back and <strong>some overreach; only those with vision see.</strong></p>
  
  <p><strong>"How, bhikkhus, do some overreach? Now some are troubled, ashamed, and
  disgusted by this very same being and they rejoice in (the idea of)
  non-being, asserting: 'In as much as this self, good sirs, when the
  body perishes at death, is annihilated and destroyed and does not
  exist after death — this is peaceful, this is excellent, this is
  reality!' Thus, bhikkhus, do some overreach.</strong></p>
</blockquote>

<p>Source: <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/iti/iti.2.042-049x.irel.html#iti-049" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/iti/iti.2.042-049x.irel.html#iti-049</a> </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"<strong>Because there actually is the next world, the view of one who thinks,
  'There is no next world' is his wrong view. Because there actually is
  the next world, when he is resolved that 'There is no next world,'
  that is his wrong resolve.</strong> Because there actually is the next world,
  when he speaks the statement, 'There is no next world,' that is his
  wrong speech. Because there actually is the next world, when he says
  that 'There is no next world,' he makes himself an opponent to those
  arahants who know the next world. Because there actually is the next
  world, when he persuades another that 'There is no next world,' that
  is persuasion in what is not true Dhamma. And in that persuasion in
  what is not true Dhamma, he exalts himself and disparages others.
  Whatever good habituation he previously had is abandoned, while bad
  habituation is manifested. And this wrong view, wrong resolve, wrong
  speech, opposition to the arahants, persuasion in what is not true
  Dhamma, exaltation of self, &amp; disparagement of others: These many
  evil, unskillful activities come into play, in dependence on wrong
  view.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Source: <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.060.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.060.than.html</a> </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"Herein, bhikkhus, a certain recluse or a brahmin asserts the
  following doctrine and view: 'The self, good sir, has material form;
  it is composed of the four primary elements and originates from father
  and mother. <strong>Since this self, good sir, is annihilated and destroyed
  with the breakup of the body and does not exist after death, at this
  point the self is completely annihilated.</strong>' In this way some proclaim
  the annihilation, destruction, and extermination of an existent being.</p>
  
  <p>"This, bhikkhus, the Tathāgata understands. And he understands: '<strong>These
  standpoints, thus assumed and thus misapprehended, lead to such a
  future destination, to such a state in the world beyond.' He
  understands as well what transcends this, yet even that understanding
  he does not misapprehend</strong>.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Source: <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.01.0.bodh.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.01.0.bodh.html</a> </p>

<p><strong>Wisdom</strong></p>

<p>Dhamma neither stops after death nor continues. Life neither exists nor not exists. Death neither exists nor not exists. Birth neither exists nor not exists. Self neither exists nor not exists. Soul neither exists nor not exists.</p>

<p>Dhamma is suffering.</p>

<p>When the conditions are present, Dhamma arises.</p>

<p>When the conditions persist, Dhamma continues.</p>

<p>When the conditions are removed, Dhamma stops.</p>

<p>What are the conditions?</p>

<p>It's the lack of wisdom (mainly lack of anatta) (avijja) giving raise to craving (tanha) giving fuel to 'clinging, attachment' (upadana) giving raise to fabrications (samkhara) giving raise to the aggregates (khandhas) giving raise to atta, soul, eternalism, nihilism, views, beliefs, etc. </p>

<p>All of the above is Dhamma.</p>

<p>All is Dhamma.</p>

<p>All the Dhamma arises simultaneously, like a burning fire.</p>

<p>Whoever fully realized Dhamma will never deny the continuation of self after death:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"<strong>Because there actually is the next world, the view of one who thinks,
  'There is a next world' is his right view. Because there actually is
  the next world</strong>, when he is resolved that 'There is a next world,' that
  is his right resolve. Because there actually is the next world, when
  he speaks the statement, 'There is a next world,' that is his right
  speech. Because there actually is the next world, when he says that
  'There is a next world,' he doesn't make himself an opponent to those
  arahants who know the next world. Because there actually is the next
  world, when he persuades another that 'There is a next world,' that is
  persuasion in what is true Dhamma. And in that persuasion in what is
  true Dhamma, he doesn't exalt himself or disparage others. Whatever
  bad habituation he previously had is abandoned, while good habituation
  is manifested. And this right view, right resolve, right speech,
  non-opposition to the arahants, persuasion in what is true Dhamma,
  non-exaltation of self, &amp; non-disparagement of others: These many
  skillful activities come into play, in dependence on right view.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Source: <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.060.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.060.than.html</a> </p>

<p>Whoever fully realized Dhamma will never deny the end of self after death:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From
  fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From
  consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&amp;-form. From
  name-&amp;-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From
  the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From
  contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a
  requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite
  condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a
  requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite
  condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging
  &amp; death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, &amp; despair come into
  play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress &amp;
  suffering.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Source: <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.015.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.015.than.html</a> </p>

<p>A wise person will never accept the end of self after death:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"<strong>With regard to this, a wise person considers thus: 'If there is no
  other world, then — at the break-up of the body, after death — this
  venerable person has made himself safe.</strong> But if there is the other
  world, then this venerable person — on the break-up of the body, after
  death — will reappear in the plane of deprivation, the bad
  destination, the lower realms, in hell. Even if we didn't speak of the
  other world and there weren't the true statement of those venerable
  brahmans &amp; contemplatives, this venerable person is still criticized
  in the here-&amp;-now by the wise as a person of bad habits &amp; wrong view:
  one who holds to a doctrine of non-existence (natthikavādo) . If there
  really is an other world, then this venerable person has made a bad
  throw twice: in that he is criticized by the wise here-&amp;-now, and in
  that — with the break-up of the body, after death — he will reappear
  in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in
  hell. Thus this safe-bet teaching, when poorly grasped &amp; poorly
  adopted by him, covers (only) one side and leaves behind the
  possibility of the skillful.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Source: <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.060.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.060.than.html</a> </p>

<p>Whoever fully realized Dhamma will never deny nor accept anything. He will always stay in the middle. </p>

<p>When verbally denying something, in reality he would not be denying it nor accepting it. When verbally accepting something, in reality he would not be accepting it nor denying it. He would always stay in the middle. </p>
 471: <p>In the <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.11.than.html#dhp-154" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Dhammapada 153-154</a>, we find the Buddha exclaiming:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Through the round of many births I roamed<br>
  without reward,<br>
  without rest,<br>
  seeking the house-builder.<br>
  Painful is birth<br>
  again &amp; again.</p>
  
  <p>House-builder, you're seen!<br>
  You will not build a house again.<br>
  All your rafters broken,<br>
  the ridge pole dismantled,<br>
  immersed in dismantling, the mind<br>
  has attained to the end of craving. </p>
</blockquote>

<p>The <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.intro.than.html#fn-153-154" rel="nofollow noreferrer">commentary</a> on these verses by <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thanissaro_Bhikkhu" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Ven. Thanissaro</a> states:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>DhpA: These verses were the Buddha's first utterance after his full
  Awakening. For some reason, they are not reported in any of the other
  canonical accounts of the events following on the Awakening.</p>
  
  <p>DhpA: "House" = selfhood; house-builder = craving. "House" may also
  refer to the nine abodes of beings — the seven stations of
  consciousness and two spheres (see <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/khp/khp.1-9.than.html#khp-4" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Khp 4</a> and <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.15.0.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">DN 15</a>).</p>
  
  <p>The word anibbisam in 153 can be read either as the negative gerund of
  nibbisati ("earning, gaining a reward") or as the negative gerund of
  nivisati, altered to fit the meter, meaning "coming to a rest,
  settled, situated." Both readings make sense in the context of the
  verse, so the word is probably intended to have a double meaning:
  without reward, without rest.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>The <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.intro.budd.html#fn-13" rel="nofollow noreferrer">commentary</a> by <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acharya_Buddharakkhita" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Acharya Buddharakkhita</a> states:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>According to the commentary, these verses are the Buddha's "Song of
  Victory," his first utterance after his Enlightenment. The <strong>house</strong> is
  individualized existence in samsara, the <strong>house-builder</strong> craving, the
  <strong>rafters</strong> the passions and the <strong>ridge-pole</strong> ignorance.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I interpret this as saying that the self ("house") is deconstructed at death, but reconstructed again in the following birth, due to craving ("house-builder"), according to <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/48/471">dependent origination</a>.</p>

<p>So, the answer to your question would be "yes, it ends, but then it arises again".</p>

<hr>

<p>Apparently, this question was asked with the skeptical view on whether rebirth truly exists or not.</p>

<p>I think this reference from the <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.02.0.than.html#recollection" rel="nofollow noreferrer">DN2</a> should lay our doubts to rest:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished,
  free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to
  imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to knowledge of the
  recollection of past lives (lit: previous homes). He recollects his
  manifold past lives, i.e., one birth, two births, three births, four,
  five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, one hundred, one thousand,
  one hundred thousand, many aeons of cosmic contraction, many aeons of
  cosmic expansion, many aeons of cosmic contraction and expansion,
  [recollecting], 'There I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had
  such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure
  and pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I
  re-arose there. There too I had such a name, belonged to such a clan,
  had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of
  pleasure and pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that
  state, I re-arose here.' Thus he recollects his manifold past lives in
  their modes and details. Just as if a man were to go from his home
  village to another village, and then from that village to yet another
  village, and then from that village back to his home village. The
  thought would occur to him, 'I went from my home village to that
  village over there. There I stood in such a way, sat in such a way,
  talked in such a way, and remained silent in such a way. From that
  village I went to that village over there, and there I stood in such a
  way, sat in such a way, talked in such a way, and remained silent in
  such a way. From that village I came back home.' In the same way —
  with his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished,
  free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to
  imperturbability — the monk directs and inclines it to knowledge of
  the recollection of past lives. He recollects his manifold past
  lives... in their modes and details.</p>
</blockquote>
