The verse opposes multiplicity (crores of arts, sects, techniques, travels, performances) to the single point of Siddhar realization: “the Guru as Oneness.” In Siddhar idiom, the contrast of “karu” (seed/cause, womb, latent origin) and “uru” (form, manifest body or product) can point both to metaphysics (causal vs. manifest) and to praxis (unrefined vs. perfected preparation). The repeated “mai-seyya” suggests an esoteric making—possibly anjana/collyrium or an alchemical black preparation—often associated with siddhi-display; thus “dancing” can be read as outward performance (koothu) or restless activity in pursuit of powers.

Against this, the line about the “formless worm-kind” indicates an inner infestation that survives all outer accomplishments: desire, egoity, vasana, karmic gnawing, or subtle life-force cravings that “abide” within attachment (maruvu) or within the body as a hidden habit-lineage. The critique is not necessarily anti-alchemy, but anti-distraction: without insight into non-dual unity, even refined techniques remain within the play of cause-and-form, and the seeker keeps chasing the ‘seed’ as an object rather than dissolving the very seed of bondage (the causal knot/impurity) through realization.