This following article challenges the idea Berkeley was making the Master Argument against an ontologically mind-independent reality : Link to Article on Berkeley
Wikipedia notes that:
"Some claim that Berkeley was not making a Master Argument at all and that what he was actually trying to show was that the substance 'matter' was actually an abstract concept that passed itself off in peoples' minds as an object of immediate experience. Rather than say that the matter cannot exist, the critics claim, Berkeley is saying that it can only exist as an abstract concept and that this abstract concept was conceptually useless."
Is this an accurate reading of Berkeley? I was always under the impression Berkeley was indeed arguing the Master Argument, straight and simple.