This verse operates on a Siddhar-style inversion of scale: the macrocosm (“akilam”—the entire world) is made small or even null depending on the state of the microcosm (the “agam”—the inner domain). The core claim is epistemic and yogic: reality’s weight is determined by where awareness is placed.

1) From mind to Self: “Akamati” (inner mind/inner knowing) is said to become “āṉ-mati” (soul-intellect / Self-knowing). In Siddhar idiom, when attention withdraws from the sense-field (pratyāhāra-like movement) and abides inwardly, the ordinary mind is transmuted into a luminous intelligence identified with the Self (“I am the ātman”).

2) Two evaluations of the world: - If inner seeing is absent: the world, though vast, is rhetorically declared to contain ‘nothing’—not in a physical sense, but as lacking enduring value, certainty, or liberating knowledge. - If inner seeing is present: the world is “māyā,” i.e., experientially real yet ontologically unstable—incapable of granting final satisfaction or liberation. The Siddhar does not necessarily deny appearances; he denies their power to define the Real once the inner is known.

3) Consequence of outwardness: The final line warns that when the “agam” is missing and one becomes purely “puram” (externalized), “ikam” (this-worldly existence: social life, possessions, sensuality, ambition, anxiety) becomes “peritu” (big)—it swells to fill the psyche. This is a psychological diagnosis expressed as metaphysical counsel: outward attention magnifies bondage; inward attention dissolves it.

The verse thus encodes a practical yogic instruction (inward-turning) alongside a metaphysical stance (māyā/appearance) and a phenomenology of suffering (worldliness grows when inner awareness is absent).