The condemnation is because adhering strictly only to Advaita and minimizing Dvaita (which is termed as Mayavada) means spiritual suicide due to sacrificing one's eternal spiritual idenitity.
Loss of identity equates to sarva-nāśa due to losing the opportunity that was given for service unto Bhagavan and His bhaktas. Hence it is said: māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa.
Here's another verse from the Chaitanya Chandramrta composed by Prabhodananda Sarasvati who was previously a Tridandi Sanyasi in Sri Rangakshetra and later accepted Gaudiya Vaishnavism after meeting Lord Chaitanya personally.
kaivalyam narakāyate tridaśa-pūr ākāśa-puṣpāyate
durdāntendriya-kāla-sarpa-paṭalīm protkhāṭa-damṣṭrāyate viśvam
pūrṇa-sukhāyate vidhi-mahendrādiś ca kīṭāyate
yat-kāruṇya-kaṭākṣa-vaibhavavatām tam ga
If we look at the above verse, it may seem that the Devas all the way up to Brahma who're worshipable to humans have been condemned as tiny insects by material calculation. However this is not so because a recipient of Gauranga's mercy has become situated in His eternal position as a servant of the Lord, cannot be compared even to Indra, Brahma and other Devas which are temporary positions and no better than an illusory dream or phantasmagoria.
Below is an example from the Sankarpa Nirakaranam in Tamil (verse 254) by the Shaiva saint Umapati Shivacharya from the 13th century which also specifically condemns Mayavada.
maya vaada peya unakku devaril oruvar untaka mevarum narakam vituttalo
arite
One who has sworn by mayavada will be punished even if there is one
Deva left and all the rest are dead, and sent to Hell.”
He is said to have criticized the philosophies of Mayavada, Aikyavada, Pashanavada, Bhedavada, Shivasamavada, Isvara ayikiyavada, Nimitta Karana parinamavada, and Shaivavada in his work.
The realization that the divine form of the Lord is superior to impersonal liberation is also accepted by Satyavrata Muni during a conversation with Sri Narada and Saunaka.
varam deva moksham na mokshavadhim va na canyam vrine ’ham vareshad
apiha idam te vapur natha gopala-balam sada me manasy avirastam kim
anyaih
O Lord, although You are able to give all kinds of benedictions, I do
not pray to You for the boon of impersonal liberation, nor the highest
liberation of eternal life in Vaikuntha, nor any other boon [which may
be obtained by executing the nine processes of bhakti]. O Lord, I
simply wish that this form of Yours as Bala Gopala in Vrindavana may
ever be manifest in my heart, for what is the use to me of any other
boon besides this? (Damodarashtakam verse 4).
As per the Bhagavata Purana, Sri Vedavyasa himself was dissatisfied even after compiling the Vedas, Mahabharata, and other shastras with perfect logic as He did not glorify the personality of Godhead.
श्रीनारद उवाच भवतानुदितप्रायं यशो भगवतोऽमलम् । येनैवासौ न तुष्येत
मन्ये तद्दर्शनं खिलम् ॥ ८ ॥
Śrī Nārada said: You have not actually broadcast the sublime and
spotless glories of the Personality of Godhead. That philosophy which
does not satisfy the transcendental senses of the Lord is considered
worthless.
न यद्वचश्चित्रपदं हरेर्यशो जगत्पवित्रं प्रगृणीत कर्हिचित् । तद्वायसं
तीर्थमुशन्ति मानसा न यत्र हंसा निरमन्त्युशिक्क्षया: ॥ १० ॥
Those words which do not describe the glories of the Lord, who alone
can sanctify the atmosphere of the whole universe, are considered by
saintly persons to be like unto a place of pilgrimage for crows. Since
the all-perfect persons are inhabitants of the transcendental abode,
they do not derive any pleasure there.
तद्वाग्विसर्गो जनताघविप्लवो यस्मिन् प्रतिश्लोकमबद्धवत्यपि ।
नामान्यनन्तस्य यशोऽङ्कितानि यत् शृण्वन्ति गायन्ति गृणन्ति साधव: ॥ ११
॥
On the other hand, that literature which is full of descriptions of
the transcendental glories of the name, fame, forms, pastimes, etc.,
of the unlimited Supreme Lord is a different creation, full of
transcendental words directed toward bringing about a revolution in
the impious lives of this world’s misdirected civilization. Such
transcendental literatures, even though imperfectly composed, are
heard, sung and accepted by purified men who are thoroughly honest.
tato ’nyathā kiñcana yad vivakṣataḥ pṛthag dṛśas
tat-kṛta-rūpa-nāmabhiḥ na karhicit kvāpi ca duḥsthitā matir labheta
vātāhata-naur ivāspadam
Whatever you desire to describe that is separate in vision from the
Lord simply reacts, with different forms, names and results, to
agitate the mind, as the wind agitates a boat which has no resting
place.
So condemnation of Mayavada where the Bheda aspect of Parabrahman (which is Achintya Bheda-Abheda) is minimized, is not uncommon. It's just that we have easier access to Gaudiya literature over other texts.
