As Brahma has come as Haridasa Thakura what is the meaning of the statement that Maya could tempt Brahma but not Haridas Thakura?

So when you’re doing Narasimha… Hare Krishna, question When Haridas Thakur is tempted by Maya Devi, it is said that Maya Devi could tempt and cause even Brahma to fall down but she could not cause Haridas Thakur to fall down. But isn’t Haridas Thakur, Brahma himself who has come as Haridas Thakur? So what does this statement mean? Answer, every statement has a particular context.
So when Haridas Thakur is playing as is associated with Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu’s pastimes there he is acting as a namacharya and in fact he is demonstrating the glory of the holy name that he was born in a loka outside the fold of Varanashram and still he has become namacharya, the acharya who is at the summit of Varanashram instructing everyone else and through his life the glory of the holy name is being demonstrated. That is one side. And in this context when the comparison is being done, Brahma is considered to be the original brahmana in the Vedic culture.
So in fact devatas are like Kshatriyas but Brahmaji is a brahmana and he is considered the original brahmana. So there what is being offered as a comparison is a comparison between the topmost Vaishnava and the topmost brahmana. And it is said that Haridas Thakur is so exalted in his devotion that something which would have caused even the fall of the topmost in the Vedic culture in brahmanical culture that is Brahmaji that could not cause the fall of Haridas Thakur.
So in this specific pastime the principles which are being compared are to be understood. If you look at the background yes it may be that Brahma has come as Haridas Thakur but Brahma represents something that the position of Brahma is that he is like a counsellor for all the gods and he is like a brahmanical advisor for them. But even he there are pastimes when he gets tempted.
He starts running after his daughter sometimes and like that he gets angry sometimes. So there are temptations where situations which demonstrate that even though he is in such an exalted position material still he can fall. So he represents the summit of brahmanical culture whereas Haridas Thakur is demonstrating that the potency of pure devotion and the power of the holy name to lift a person from what is at the lowest levels of Varanashram, somebody outside Varanashram, Amritsar can become a Namacharya.
So in this pastime in this particular comparison you should focus on the principles that are represented and understand that it is a glorification of pure devotion and the holy name as compared with the glorification of the materially exalted position within brahmanical culture from the Varanashram perspective. Thank you.