If God is the source of everything, then where from this anger comes? It comes from God. How you can deny it? Why God should not be angry? If Kṛṣṇa says, ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavo mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate (BG 10.8)
"I am the source of everything," so anger is not within the categories of everything? So why God should not be angry? He must be angry. But He is angry on the nondevotee, not on His devotee. On the demons He is angry.
So anger has got some utilization; not that I should not be angry. I should use my anger on some particular occasion. It is not that I cut off anger. That is . . . to become impotent is not good, but you have got full potency, but you can have sex life when it is required. To become impotent is not required. You should be fully potent, but not misuse it. That is required.
Similarly, there is no misuse by God or His devotee. Otherwise, there is no question of . . . that the devotee or God should not be angry; but they know how to use it. That is the difference. As God knows where to use anger, similarly, devotee should also know where to use anger. "I am not angry. You can beat me with shoes, I am not angry." That is not devotional. You see? But the thing is, a devotee is not angry on his personal account. Just like God also does not become angry on His personal account.
Suppose Hiraṇyakaśipu wants to hurt Kṛṣṇa. What he can do to Kṛṣṇa? So where is the cause of anger? He was angry not that Hiraṇyakaśipu was a demon or non-devotee; He was angry because that demon was teasing the devotee. For His personal account, He cannot be angry. What anyone can harm Kṛṣṇa? He is so powerful.
Suppose a small ant comes and bites me. So is that the cause of my anger? No. What is that? That is nothing. Similarly, what Hiraṇyakaśipu can do so that the Lord should be angry? But then why then He was angry? He was angry for His devotee.