I could not agree more, and my suggestion was not meant to be a substitute for the necessary thorough grounding that you advocate before embarking too far on Heidegger's pathways. When I started reading Heidegger I, like many others, at first found his locutions difficult, so I turned to the many commentaries. While these were often helpful in clarifying certain Heideggerian themes, at times they also almost deterred me from exploring his works any further, lest I be infected by an insidious underlying political virus. However, I decided to read his own works slowly and patiently, with as few preconceptions as possible, and found little that resembles the rhetoric and content of  National Socialism (I am not saying that the discussions around this controversy are of no consequence). As I have become more accustomed to his way of thinking, I also agree with you in your other posting that he is not 'obscure', but does require from his readers a transformed manner of thinking with which we may not be comfortable.
Yet along his pathways, we may across some sights that spark something in us, something from ourselves. Being our interpretation it may well be one with which Heidegger himself would have reservations, so we should be careful not to make claims on his behalf. As Heidegger said in Identity and Difference, there are times to “sow a seed here and there, a seed of thinking which some time or other may bloom in its own way and bring forth fruit”.