Original sentence: According to Vetter, those suttas which do lend support to Gomez probably originated with a heterodox ascetic group that pre-dated the Buddha, and were integrated into the Buddhist Sangha at an early date, bringing with them some suttas that were already in existence and also composing further suttas in which they tried to combine their own teachings with those of the Buddha.After Gomez had proposed these texts as a sort of proto-Madhyamaka, a leading Dutch Pali scholar, Tillman Vetter, re-examined the evidence.Thus if both Gomez and Vetter are correct, Madhyamaka would represent a continuation of a heterodox strand within Buddhism, rather than either a totally or largely orthodox one, as held by some scholars
Edited sentence: According to Vetter, those suttas which do lend support to Gomez probably originated with a heterodox ascetic group that pre-dated the Buddha.After Gomez had identified these texts as a form of proto-Madhyamaka, a leading Dutch Pali scholar, Tillman Vetter, re-examined the evidence.In particular, the position  propounded in these suttas which rejects all views and has "nothingness" as its religious ideal is diametrically opposed to the normative Buddhism of the Nikāyas.It is certain that these deviant suttas would have been known to the proponents of the Madhyamaka and were likely to have provided them with inspiration, which, of course, begs the question whether the later Madhyamaka doctrinal position to that extent, especially in its Prāsaṅgika form, can be considered to reflect the authentic teachings of the historical Buddha.The members of this group were integrated into the Buddhist Sangha at an early date, bringing with them some suttas that were already in existence and also composing further suttas in which they tried to combine their own teachings with those of the Buddha