To say that theology is divided on this issue, you need to present divided perspectives/translations of theological works, be they ancient and modern. If all acharyas (irrespective of their other divisions, like Vaishnava/Saiva or Advaita/Dvaita etc) interpret something consistently in one way, and you alone choose to interpret it in another way, that cannot mean a broad theological division, of course unless you create your own independent Sanskrit dictionary and make your translations of theological works, and start a sect of your own 
Asrama is a dharma. But the message of the Upanishads is Atma jnanam which is beyond dharma-adharma.
For salvation, to go to Sannyasa is the rule for all humans. But if someone wants to first enjoy this world, then Asrama dharma is prescribed for them, so they will be disgusted by it and will move to Sannyasa at the end.
I had clearly explained this in the below message, about a week ago.
https://www.tamilbrahmins.com/showthread.php?t=38700&p=409603#post409603
I don't know why you again presume this wrong translation of the word virajet, while in the earlier discussion, you ended up by doubting this.
There is no 'violation', since a bare reading of the Jabala upanishad will clearly show that Sannyasa is the goal, the rule. This is how all sages and seers have interpreted the texts. You cannot show a single sage/seer who has interpreted the slokas to mean a 'violation'. Hence there is no theological division in this regard.
But as I mentioned earlier, you have all the right to (mis)interpret the scriptures in your whichever way, and start a sect of your own too 
