Rigveda is much better than the rest though it also betrays its very human authorship.
Dear Shri Sanghom,
Are not Vedas heard as Srutis? You believe that there is human authorship of Vedas and if so, is it God's Will that it should be so?
Dear Shri Kahanam,
I am not convinced by the belief that vedas are "apourusheya"; (not-human works, literally). Hence I also do not feel the oft-heard belief that the vedas are eternal, vibrations in the ether
; circulating the universe without beginning or end, and rishis, due to their special powers/capacity could decipher, overhear, or receive the audio (just like a radio receiver) and transmit it for the welfare of the world, nay, the universe itself in the form of the audible sound which is vedas.
The subject matters, the very many appeals made to various (rigvedic) deities etc., convince me that these are poetical inspirations of a set of people who composed these verses (riks, as they are known as). Now it might be asked "wherefrom did the inspiration come, was it not of divine origin?";. My answer is 'may be', but it is the same sort of inspiration which made Valmiki compose the AdikAvya, Rabindra Nath Tagore the Gitanjali, Narayana guru the AtmopadESa Satakam, and several other secular poets who wrote magnificent poetry throughout the world in the very many different languages. In short it is the normal poetic ability of some human beings.
I am just giving below one extreme example of how secular or mundane (or obscene?) a rik can be; this does not mean the entire rigveda is of the same nature, but just to show that rigveda is a compilation of poems by many authors:
na sESE yasyarambatEntarAskRuthyAkapRut
viSvasmAdindra uttaraH RV, X-86-16
न सॆशॆ यस्यरम्बतॆन्तरास्कृथ्याकपृत्
विश्वस्मादिन्द्र उत्तरः १० -८६-१६
ந ஸேசே யஸ்யரம்பதேந்தராஸக்ருத்யாகப்ருத்
விச்வஸ்மாதிந்த்ர உத்தர: ரிக்வேதம், ௧0-௮௬-௧௬
(This rik is from what is called vrishAkapi sUktam; to which some scholars trace back Valmiki's idea of monkeys assisting Rama, and the deification of Hanuman as a god.)
O Indra ! One whose penis hangs down between his thighs, does not have the ability to copulate. The one whose penis is capable of opening the hairy vagina, he alone is good for intercourse.
My Indra is better than the entire world.
sAyaNa in his commentary has tried to polish the above straightforward word-for-word meaning as best as he could, but not able to avoid everything and arriving at a somewhat different meaning, as under:
O Indra ! One whose satisfaction of desire (pleasure) depends only on the centre of the thighs of women, is not fit for performing actions like yaga and tapas. One, whose pleasure increases constantly by ruminating on the hairy vagina, also is unfit to perform yagas and tapas. My Indra is not like these; he is fit for performing yagas and tapas; he is above the entire world.
There are a few more similar instances in the rigveda which makes me conclude that these are very ordinary expressions of very ordinary mortals, nothing esoteric about them. They are very much like as our secular poetry also contains some very sublime poems to some rank obscene contents.
Just to finish this post in a lighter vein, I give below the meaning of a small poem of Chemmanam Chacko, a contemporary Malayalam poet, which also looks inspired when one reads it in Malayalam:
"The teacher came to the class
and asked the students to open their books at lesson two.
it was about Sita parinayam.
He asked them to read the lesson aloud and went out,
to smoke a beedi.
The inspector of Schools entered just at that point
Looking at the lesson, he asked one student,
"Who broke Siva's bow?"
The student replied, with a terrified look,
"Not me Sir, I did not do it."
Just then the teacher came back to the class.
He told the Inspector, "Sir, he is a very good student,
he won't do any such mischief, I am sure."
The headmaster came hearing the conversation.
He asserted, "as the headmaster of this school,
I can certify that this student will never do any such wrong thing,
he won't destroy another's property." !!