You may find this most apt for clarifying your doubt on the query on Paratvam

In the Vedarthasangraha, Sri Ramanuja explains how Sriyah Pati

(Sriman Narayanan) alone is the Supreme Being described in
the Vedas and Vedanta. The Vedas declare the nature of
the Supreme Truth in many ways.

Sometimes them call It Brahman (the great and glorious

essence); other times they call It Sat (Being); still other
times they call It Purusha, other times Vishnu, Rudra, Atma,
Paramaatma, etc. How are we to reconcile all these various
names?

surely they all refer to one Supreme, as the Vedas declare

thatthere is only one Supreme Cause -- ekam eva
advitIyam. Fortunately, the Vedas themselves offer a
reconciliation ofall these names, contained
in the various Upanishads and even in the text of the
Veda proper.

In the Purusha Sukta, found in all four Vedas, the

Supreme Brahman is described as the Being who exists
everywhere. At the end of this glorious Sukta, the
Purusha is described:

hrISca te lakshmISca patnyau

He who has Hri (Bhudevi) and Lakshmi as His eternal

consorts or attributes.

similarly, in the Chhandogya Upanishad, we have the

description of the Supreme Person as ``tasya yatha
kapyaasam pundarikam eva akshini'' -- His eyes have
the beauty of the petals of a lotus, just unfolding
under the rays of the sun and crowning a rich stalk.
In all religious literature, only Vishnu is addressed
as the ``lotus-eyed one''.

There are even more direct Veda vaakyas. For example,

in the Rig Veda, we see tad viSNOh paramam padam, sadaa
paSyanti sUrayah

-- the enlightened seers always perceive the supreme abode

of Vishnu, a reference to the nitya suris. A similar
reference is found in the Katha Upanishad.

The Taittiriya Aranyaka explicitly reconciles all

the various names of the Supreme found in the Vedas
and encompasses them all under the term
``Narayana''
in the Narayana Sukta. Taking note of the terms
Sat, Brahman, Atma, Akshara, all found in the Upanishads,
the Sukta goes on to declare viSvam naaraayaNam devam

All is Narayana.

and
sa brahmA sa SivaH sendraH sO 'ksharaH paramaH svaraaT
Narayana is Brahma, Siva, Indra, the Imperishable, the
Supreme Independent.

these two vaakyas clearly enunciate the principle that

the concept of Narayana encompasses all other deities.
Even otherwise, the etymological meaning of
the word Narayana has perhaps the deepest philosophical
significance of any name of God, over and above even the
terms Vishnu Siva, Brahma, Indra, etc. The latter
terms respectively mean ``pure'',
``great'', and ``king'',
and are applicable to any number of things, including
the individual self. However, Narayana means ``That in
which all creatures rest'', which by implication
can only
refer to the Supreme.

It is true that the Vedas themselves often praise other

gods. However, usually these are in the context of
the Vedic sacrifice, which is not the highest essence
of Vedic teaching. When it comes to the purely
philosophical portions, it is quite clear that the
personality to which the vaakyas refer is only
Narayana.

Of course, we should not ignore the Bhagavad Gita,

considered by all Vedic acharyas as the essence of the
Vedas.

With this immense Vedic tradition behind them,

it is a wonder that some people call Sri Vaishnavas
closed-minded for choosing to worship only Narayanan!

This is not to say that the other forms of

worship, be it Saivism, worship of Devi, Christianity,
etc., are devoid of significance! Rather, we can
only say that they are not as firmly rooted in Vedic
tradition as is the concept of Narayana. Naturally,
Truth can be found outside the text of the Vedas, lending
authority to the various different creeds that exist.
The only point being made here is that the Vedas and
Divya Prabandham describe the Ultimate Truth as Narayana
and sanction worship of God conceived in those terms.

As we would have noted, even Sankaracharya considered

used the name Narayana when referring to God. Many stotras
are ascribed to him when he may or may not have authored.
However, in his undisputed authentic works, such as his
commentaries on the Upanishads, Gita, and Brahma-sutras,
he invariably refers to Narayana as the Supreme Essence.
His immediate disciples do the same.

***
I would like to make one important correction in this article of yours.Nowhere in
the Vedas the term SIVA was used to refer to Lord Siva.The Term Siva came to be
used to refer to Lord RUDRA only after the advent of Naayanmaars who founded
Sivaism.The term Siva in Vedas was used as a mere word in Sanskrit which means
Auspiciousness and especially in PurushaSuktha the term Siva means One who is
auspicious (refers to Parabrahman Lord NAARAAYANA) in the verse quoted by you.The
Saivaas may similarly claim that the term Naaraayana does not mean LORD Naaraayana
of Vaishnavism and only refers to Lord Siva.But, MAHARSHI PAANINI in his
ASHTAADHYAAYI explains: For (eg:) soorpasya nakaa iti soorpaNkaa meaning One who
has long nails, refers to only SoorpanaNakaa the sister of RaavaNaa and not
anyone.Because from Soorpasya naaka we get Soorpanakaa and Soorpananakaa refers to
anyone having long nails but In SoorpaNakaa we have Na and not na which
specifically refers to the sister of RavaNa.Similarly, Naaraanaam ayanam yasya sah
ithi NaaraayaNah
here it refers to LORD SRIMAN NaaraayaNah because in Naaraanaam ayanam yasya shha
iti Naaraayanah it refers to anyone but in NaarayaNah the letter is Na and not na
which specifically refers to LORD SRIMAN NaaraayaNah.The name NaaraayaNa means ONE
WHO IS IN ALL and IN WHOM EVERYTHING IS.Hence, Maharshi Paanini has clearly
established that LORD NAARAYANA is the Supreme BRAHMAN.
Trust this clarifies.
Regards
Namo narayana
dAsan