Similarly, even in the sphere of upAsanA, vEdAs don't proclaim either 'Vishnu alone is superior and Shiva is inferior' or 'Shiva alone is superior and
Vishnu is inferior'. vEdAs consider all the deities as [*the manifestation of*] the same paramAthmA and view all of them equally. In rudram, every thing would have been
referred to as the Shiva svarUpam [*form*]. Purusha sUktham may see every thing as Vishnu svarUpam. In some other place, varunA himself would have been referred to as paramAthmA; IndrA would have been
identified as paramEshvarA; Agni as the only primordial godhead [*Muzhu-mudhaR-kadavuL*]; SuryA as the primordial God etc. Thus, it can be seen that, whenever vEdic sUkthAs refer to
any deity, they identify it as the paramAtman Himself. Infact, vEdAs have unequivocally concluded that 'There exists only one satyA; many names have been give to it by gyAnis'(yEkam-sat-viprAhA-bahuthA-vadhanthI).
Even the dharma shAstrAs (smrithIs), which follow exactly the vEdAs, don't subscribe to the exclusive superiority of any particular deity - neither of Shiva nor of Vishnu nor of ambAl nor of any other [*vEdic*] deity. But still, both shruthi and smrithi approve of the principle of ishta dEvathA - worship of any deity, towards which the mind naturally flows and gets absorbed in, out of bhakthi, as the primordial godhead. Following this [*advice*], while doing upAsanA specially for their ishta dEvathA(s), smArthAs offered worship to other dEvathAs also, without engaging in any nindhanA, through panchAyathana pUjA.
As the karmA theory of vEdAs got into a loop of misinterpretation and confusion [*kuzhaRupadi*] by the stand of mImAmsakAs that, "Every thing is kArmA", in the later days even the vEdic path of upAsanA got trapped into a similar situation wherein fights regarding the superiority of respective ishta dEvatAs became quite common.
Thus, when both the paths of karmA and bhakti were in a state of confusion [*due to wrong interpretations and practices*] and when even the gyAna mArga was brought down to a similar state by Bhudhists, our AchAryAl took avathAr and rectified and brought every thing back to its original shape/position and gave a step-by-step procedure [*for spiritual evolution i.e. karma-bhakti- gyAna*]. ACHARYAL HAS NOT CREATED ANY NEW PATH ON HIS OWN BUT ONLY RENOVATED THE ORIGINAL ONE [*ie the vEdic path*]. When the path of sanAdhana vEda dharmA, also known as smArtha sampradhAyam became ridden with stones and thorns, HE JUST CLEANSED THAT SMARTHA WAY, by removing those stones and thorns but DID NOT CREATE A NEW PATH.
For those who accepted the vEdic dictum of ishta dEvathA upAsana - gAnapathyAs who worshipped pillayAr [*GanEshA*] as the primordial godhead, KaumArAs who worshipped SubramanyA, sAkthAs who worshipped ambAl, saivaites who worshipped IshvarA, vaishanvaites who worshipped Vishnu, SaurAs who worshipped SuryA - He cleansed all their paths [*of any non-vEdic practices*] and brought them under the vEdic fold. That is why He is known as Shanmatha sthApanAchAryA. He establised this to facilitate the worship of one's ishta dEvathA with out having to indulge in the nindA [*abuse*] of anya-dEvathA(s). As shown by the verse'Adithyam-ambikAm-viushnum-gananAtham-Maheswaram', He got all the smArthAs to do panchAyathana pUja for these five mUrtis, as it was in vogue originally. (As all the vaidhIka karmAnushtAnAs related to Agni are said to reach Subrahmanya, one of the deities of the shanmathA, it can fairly be concluded that AchAryAl has chosen not to include Him [*Subrahmanya*] in the panchAyathana).
Therefore, NO NEW SAMPRADHAYA SUCH AS 'SHANKARA SAMPRADHAYA' HAS EVER GOT CREATED. WHEN THE ORIGINAL SMARTHA SAMPRADHAYAM OR THE VEDIC PATH BECAME DILAPIDATED IN BETWEEN, IT GOT REJUVENATED AND BROUGHT TO LIFE BETTER THAN EVER BEFORE BY SHANKARA. Therefore, if any one refers to it as 'Shankara sampradhAya', then it is wrong; even if I had referred to it that way, then also it is wrong.
[Note: Parts of sentences which are given in bold in the Tamil original, are reproduced here in capitals]