How does Ajita Kesakambali compare to the Buddha?

DN 2 states: > *When this was said, Ajita Kesakambalin said to me, 'Great king, there is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no > fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no > other world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no > brahmans or contemplatives who, faring rightly and practicing rightly, > proclaim this world and the other after having directly known and > realized it for themselves. A person is a composite of four primary > elements. At death, the earth (in the body) returns to and merges with > the (external) earth-substance. The fire returns to and merges with > the external fire-substance. The liquid returns to and merges with the > external liquid-substance. The wind returns to and merges with the > external wind-substance. The sense-faculties scatter into space. Four > men, with the bier as the fifth, carry the corpse. Its eulogies are > sounded only as far as the charnel ground. The bones turn > pigeon-colored. The offerings end in ashes. Generosity is taught by > idiots. The words of those who speak of existence after death are > false, empty chatter. With the break-up of the body, the wise and the > foolish alike are annihilated, destroyed. They do not exist after > death.'* Ajita Kesakambali is similar to another wrong view, found in DN 1, namely: > *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*. Now the Buddha taught extensively about the elements, such as in MN 115 & MN 140. Or in MN 43, Sariputta mentions how the sense faculties are scattered at the termination of life, as follows: > *Yvāyaṃ, āvuso, mato kālaṅkato tassa kāyasaṅkhārā niruddhā paṭippassaddhā, vacīsaṅkhārā niruddhāniruddha paṭippassaddhā, cittasaṅkhārā niruddhā > paṭippassaddhā, āyu parikkhīṇo, usmā vūpasantā, indriyāni > paribhinnāni.* > > *In the case of the one who is dead, who has completed his time, his bodily fabrications have ceased & subsided, his verbal fabrications > ... his mental fabrications have ceased & subsided, his vitality is > exhausted, his heat subsided, & his faculties are scattered.* How do the teachings of Ajita Kesakambali & other annihilationists compare to those of the Buddha? What makes them different?