These are upādhis. "I am a good man," "I am a bad man," both of them are designations. From spiritual point of view, there is no difference between good man and bad man. Caitanya-caritāmṛta says, dvaite bhadrābhadra sakali samāna (CC Antya 4.176). So long you are in the material platform, the so-called goodness and badness, they are all the same—because you are in the material platform.
So to become a very good man . . . just like an ideal good man was Gandhi. Or somebody else. We are giving, because Gandhi's respected all over the world as a very good man. That's a fact. But that is not sufficient. That is not sufficient. Therefore the śāstra says that you should become free from becoming a good man or bad man. You must become a devotee. That is required. To become a good man of this world is not a very good qualification.
Therefore it is said here, naṣṭa-prāyeṣu abhadreṣu. To become bad man . . . and if you become a good man, it is partially acceptable, because you have avoided the two other things, namely ignorance and passion. But that is not sufficient. But it is favorable. To become a good man, to become a brāhmin, is favorable. Because to . . . by becoming a brāhmin, one is able to understand things as they are. He's not in ignorance.
Just like a ignorant, a cats and dogs, they are under the bodily concept of life: "I am this body." But a brāhmin is not in the bodily concept of life. He knows, ahaṁ brahmāsmi, "I am part and parcel of Brahman." This knowledge will help him.