The OP mentioned about [Sri Madhvacharya's interpretation][1] of Manyu Sukta in the Comment section, and thus I am not mentioning about it again. So I will confine my answer to my observation only. Sri Madhvacharya interpreted the Veda, suiting to his way of worshipping the Almighty God. Another such interpretation is on [Balitha Sukta of Rig Veda][2]. ---- Rig Veda [X.83][3] and [X.84][4] mention about Manyu Sukta. We have to remember that the brAhmanAs and subsequent literature came into existence ***to interpret the Veda and as an extension of the Veda***. The Stories or Myths that were indicated in the [Bṛhaddevatā][5], like fight of Vamadeva with Indra, Indra-Vaikuntha, etc, had been the products of subsequent literature only, which do not find place in Rig Veda. ---- We have to remember that Vishnu was mentioned as an epithet of the Almighty God in Rig Veda, as Indra, Agni, Vayu, etc, were mentioned. We should also remember that the [3 steps of Vishnu][6] mentioned in the Rig Veda does not indicate the Vamana avatara, but indicates the all pervasiveness of the Almighty God. ---- If we understand this background of the Rig Veda, then we can easily understand that Sri Madhwacharya wrongly interpreted the Manyu Sukta. [1]: https://chodayithri.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/manyusukta-ttd.pdf [2]: https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/39838 [3]: https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rvsan/rv10083.htm [4]: https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rvsan/rv10084.htm [5]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%E1%B9%9Bhaddevat%C4%81 [6]: https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/35963/3869