Vedas 

There is an unchanged tradition that the Vedas were "seen," and not composed, by the great rshis whose names they are often associated with. As you are probably aware, there is a detailed and intricate argument to show why it is a fallacy to hold that the Vedas are composed texts, and to show that they must be accepted to be unauthored. The Vedic mantra-drashtas when absorbed in meditation envisioned great truths which flashed in their minds by Divine grace.

Many texts in the Vedas themselves point to the total inadequacy of the mind to grasp and the words to express the Divine Being. Deeper understanding of such texts is possible with training, intuition and commentaries of those great minds like Sri Madhva, who have experienced the truth and expressed it in more elaborate terms. The use of symbols and metaphors, extreme brevity of statement, contextual assignment of meaning to expressions, complexity of the Supreme Divine person and His relationships with the rest of the world, and the apparent inconsistency in different passages make the task of understanding the Vedas a formidable one.

The Vedas cannot be just read like a book on the basis of an acquaintance with the language and grammar. An expression like "mRda bravIt" -- the mud spoke, "yajamAnah prastaraH" -- the person performing the sacrifice in a bundle of darbha grass, etc., would be totally meaningless for such a person. 

Sayana, who has written a full commentary upon the Vedas, observes: "na hi vedasya kartAraH draStAraH sarva eva hi." The practice of rigidly maintaining the textual accuracy, coupled with unalterable prescription of recitation norms, interpretation rules, etc., have ensured unchanged texts for thousands of years, which can only be interpreted and understood as per clearly laid down procedures. No attempts have been made even by gifted seers, saints, and scholars in all history to streamline or remove the apparent superficial contradictions of the texts by giving up or altering some of them. There has also been a commonly held faith since time immemorial that Vedic texts when ritually recited along with performance of specified rites, do give extra-ordinary results in this world and also lead to bliss in heaven. Some passages also form the elements of the prescribed daily prayers and observances like the daily sandhyavandanam. 

Thus, all Vedantic schools claim their legitimacy on these scriptural texts; even smRtis which lay down codes in different disciplines rigorously espouse the zruti texts. In fact, it is considered that the Vedas which were  really not composed by any one (including God) are eternal and contain not only the prescriptions of daily duties of life, but also serve as the beacon lights leading one to God-realization and mokSa (more of this in another document).

Mahuli R. Gopalacharya says: 

The Vedas have been for millennia considered to be the supreme authority on Parama-tattvas and the duties of man towards God and his fellow creatures. The Rg Veda is admittedly the oldest literary monument of the world. It contains hymns in praise of God -- one supreme God with different names and forms. The Vedic bards while they were in close communion with God pervading all universe were in ecstasy, so much that they felt themselves beyond the boundary of space and time ..... The Rg Veda in particular, is quoted as supreme authority even in other Vedas.

The Vedic suktas are generally accepted to have a number of meanings, based on the canons of interpretational rules: 

Adibhautika -- regarding the external world 

Adidaivika -- regarding the deity which controls the manifestation 

AdhyAtmika -- regarding the universal spirit or Supreme Deity

For instance, the `ushas' described in a Rik mantra (Rg Veda I.48) referring to the dawn, means  the (physical) dawn, the deity USas (abhimAni devata for dawn) and the dawn of spiritual knowledge. References to words such as `dhenavaH' -- cows, vRSabhaH -- bull, etc., are metaphorical, and are applied to the guardian deities or to the Supreme Being. No word may be interpreted in a manner which is inconsistent with the text as a whole. The symbolic character of the language and the mystic and out-of-this-world experiences of the seers, where words seem to convey but little of what is being directly experienced, always make the interpretational work of Vedic texts a difficult and daunting prospect. Perhaps it needs a mystic mind to decipher the language of the Vedas. Sri Madhva himself has quoted in another context an authority that defines the qualities of a seer of the Vedas. In his commentary upon the Aitareya Upanishad, he has also quoted from the Rg Veda itself: 

yasti tyAja sacividaM sakhAyaM na tasya vAcyApi bhAgo asti |
yadim zRnoty alakam nahi praveda sukRtasya panthAm || Rg-veda, X.71.6 

He who gives up (in his Vedic study) his eternal companion (ZrIman NArAyaNa), his speech/exposition is unsound; whatever he hears, he hears amiss; he is certainly not on the path of virtue.

Therefore, it is extremely important to keep in mind the true purport of the Vedas, while attempting any commentary upon them. Incoherent efforts randomly focused on various deities, non-deities, etc., are not considered to be of virtue.