Which tradition to follow
The canon gives a test, not a ranking. The Kālāmas were told to set aside lineage, scripture, and a teacher's reputation and to look at what a practice produces — whether greed, hatred, and delusion grow or shrink. The blind men and the elephant is often quoted here and it is worth reading in its actual form, which is not a case for all views being equal. A tradition is a raft. The suttas will not choose one for you, and they gently suggest that the choosing may have become its own way of not practising.
What the suttas say
where each takes the other as a fool. Relying on others they state their contention, desiring praise while claiming to be skilled. Addicted to debating in the midst of the assembly, their need for praise makes them nervous. But when they’re repudiated they get embarrassed;
The anatomy of the argument — praise-seeking, anxiety, embarrassment, fault-finding — as fresh as any comment thread.
Where this stops: Never a reason to keep quiet about a real harm.
Snp 4.8:2.2–3.3 · With Pasūra
Bālaṁ dahantī mithu aññamaññaṁ; Vadanti te aññasitā kathojjaṁ, Pasaṁsakāmā kusalā vadānā. Yutto kathāyaṁ parisāya majjhe, Pasaṁsamicchaṁ vinighāti hoti; Apāhatasmiṁ pana maṅku hoti,
don’t go by oral transmission, don’t go by lineage, don’t go by testament, don’t go by canonical authority, don’t rely on logic, don’t rely on inference, don’t go by reasoned train of thought, don’t go by the acceptance of a view after deliberation, don’t go by the appearance of competence, and don’t think “The ascetic is our respected teacher.” But when you know for yourselves:
The Kālāma discourse — the canon's charter for testing teachings.
Where this stops: It is not permission to believe whatever one likes; it ends with what the wise praise. Never a reason to stay with a teacher who is doing harm.
AN 3.65:25.3–25.4 · With the Kālāmas of Kesamutta
Mā anussavena, mā paramparāya, mā itikirāya, mā piṭakasampadānena, mā takkahetu, mā nayahetu, mā ākāraparivitakkena, mā diṭṭhinijjhānakkhantiyā, mā bhabbarūpatāya, mā samaṇo no garūti. Yadā tumhe kālāmā attanāva jāneyyātha:
Saying, ‘Such is an elephant, not such! Such is not an elephant, such is!’ they punched each other with their fists. At that, the king was pleased. In the same way, mendicants, the wanderers of other religions are blind and sightless. They don’t understand what is beneficial or what is not beneficial, nor what is the truth and what is not the truth. That’s why they are fighting, quarreling, and disputing, continually wounding each other with barbed words.
The blind men and the elephant, in its canonical form and with its actual conclusion.
Where this stops: The sutta is about sectarian wanderers, not about all views being equally partial; it does not say the Buddha's teaching is one more hand on the elephant.
Ud 6.4:30.1–31.3 · Followers of Various Other Religions (1st)
Te ‘ediso hatthī, nediso hatthī; nediso hatthī, ediso hatthī’ti aññamaññaṁ muṭṭhīhi saṁsumbhiṁsu. Tena ca pana, bhikkhave, so rājā attamano ahosi. Evamevaṁ kho, bhikkhave, aññatitthiyā paribbājakā andhā acakkhukā. Te atthaṁ na jānanti anatthaṁ na jānanti, dhammaṁ na jānanti adhammaṁ na jānanti. Te atthaṁ ajānantā anatthaṁ ajānantā, dhammaṁ ajānantā adhammaṁ ajānantā bhaṇḍanajātā kalahajātā vivādāpannā aññamaññaṁ mukhasattīhi vitudantā viharanti:
Mendicants, a mendicant who is an inquirer, unable to encompass another’s mind, should scrutinize the Realized One for two things—things that can be seen and heard: ‘Can anything corrupt be seen or heard in the Realized One or not?’ Scrutinizing him they find that nothing corrupt can be seen or heard in the Realized One.
The Buddha's own instructions for scrutinizing a teacher, including himself.
Where this stops: Never a reason to stay with a teacher who is doing harm.
MN 47:4.1–4.4 · The Inquirer
Vīmaṁsakena, bhikkhave, bhikkhunā parassa cetopariyāyaṁ ajānantena dvīsu dhammesu tathāgato samannesitabbo cakkhusotaviññeyyesu dhammesu: ‘ye saṅkiliṭṭhā cakkhusotaviññeyyā dhammā, saṁvijjanti vā te tathāgatassa no vā’ti? Tamenaṁ samannesamāno evaṁ jānāti: ‘ye saṅkiliṭṭhā cakkhusotaviññeyyā dhammā, na te tathāgatassa saṁvijjantī’ti.
In the same way, I have taught a simile of the teaching as a raft: for crossing over, not for holding on. By understanding the simile of the raft, you will even give up the teachings, let alone what is not the teachings.
The raft — the teaching itself is not to be clung to.
Where this stops: Said to a monk who had misread the Dhamma as licensing sensual pleasure; letting go even of the teachings means not grasping them, not discarding them.
MN 22:13.26–14.1 · The Simile of the Cobra
Evameva kho, bhikkhave, kullūpamo mayā dhammo desito nittharaṇatthāya, no gahaṇatthāya. Kullūpamaṁ vo, bhikkhave, dhammaṁ desitaṁ, ājānantehi dhammāpi vo pahātabbā pageva adhammā.