446
Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam
[Canto 3, Ch. 12]
Godhead, Vāsudeva, need not care for any other obligation. It is enjoined in the  Bhāgavatam :
devarṣi-bhūtāpta-nṛṇāṁ pitṛṇāṁ na kiṅkaro nāyam ṛṇī ca rājan sarvātmanā yaḥ śaraṇaṁ śaraṇyaṁ gato mukundaṁ parihṛtya kartam
“Anyone who has completely given up all worldly relationships and has taken absolute shelter of the lotus feet of the Lord, who gives us salvation and who alone is fit to be taken shelter of, is no longer a debtor or servant of anyone, including the demigods, forefathers, sages, other living entities, relatives and members of human society.” ( Bhāg.  11.5.41) Thus there was nothing wrong in the acts of the Kumāras when they refused their great father’s request that they become family men.
TEXT 6
सोऽवध्यातः सुतैरेवं प्रत्याख्यानानुशासनैः । क्रोधं दुर्विषदं जातं नियन्तुमुपचक्रमे ॥ ६ ॥
so'vadhyātaḥ sutair evaṁ pratyākhyātānuśāsanaiḥ krodhaṁ durviṣahaṁ jātaṁ niyantum upacakrame
saḥ—he (Brahmā); avadhyātaḥ—thus being disrespected; sutaiḥ—by the sons; evam—thus; pratyākhyāta—refusing to obey; anuśāsanaiḥ—the order of their father; krodham—anger; durviṣaham—too much to be tolerated; jātam—thus generated; niyantum—to control; upacakrame—tried his best.
TRANSLATION
On the refusal of the sons to obey the order of their father, there was much anger generated in the mind of Brahmā, which he tried to control and not express.
PURPORT
Brahmā is the director in charge of the modes of passion of material nature. Therefore it was natural for him to become angry on the refusal of his sons to obey his order. Although the Kumāras were right in such acts of refusal, Brahmā, being absorbed in the mode of passion, could not check