In this context, it's important to remember how Rod Hemsell demolished Ken Wilber's misinterpretation of Sri Aurobindo in January, 2002 and the series of essays M. Alan Kazlev wrote subsequently. As regards Peter Heehs, barring that single page involving biographical matters, he can't be accused of distorting the teaching or philosophy. Rather, his 2006 Hyderabad speech on Hinduism has proved to be a big hurdle for supporters of Hindutva who are trying hard to appropriate Sri Aurobindo.
A very common feature with Sri Aurobindo is that his name is always mentioned along with three or four other luminaries. This is the most misleading aspect about him since he himself has written his disagreements with his famous contemporaries and other revered authorities. So, instead of treating Sri Aurobindo as part of some Perennial philosophy, his own innovations and synthesis need to be presented with precision. Otherwise, one indulges in avoidable disstortion. [TNM55]