S. R. Faruqi:

The opening-verse is commonplace, but in it there are also two small points worth noting. The first is that with regard to the enduring of griefs and the showing of patience, do din and jūñ tūñ are interesting, and the most interesting thing is that in enduring griefs and showing patience-- in both situations-- the preparation for dying continued. That is, to show patience was as troublesome as to endure grief.

The second point is that marne ke muhaiyā honā is an idiom, one that is not found in any dictionary. That is, muhaiyā meaning 'present for use, rendered available', etc., is a modern idiom. (For example, we say ghar kī ẓarūrat kā sārā sāmān muhaiyā thā , or ḥukūmat kā farẓ hai kih riʿāyā ko ġhallah muhaiyā hai .) But muhaiyā meaning 'ready, arrived, prepared' as Barkati Sahib has written, and as is found in several other dictionaries as well, is not now used [though it is used in Persian, as for example by Bedil].

Even more significantly, jāne ke muhaiyā , or marne ke muhaiyā , etc.-- that is, 'ready (for something), arrived' is in no dictionary at all, but Mir has used it again in the fourth divan itself [{1482,11}]:

kab tak yih bad-sharābī pīrī to mīr āʾī
jāne ke ho muhaiyā ab kar chalo bhalā kuchh

[how long this 'undignified behavior' [bad-sharābī ]? -- old age, Mir, has come
having become prepared to go-- enough, now, get a move on!]

By way of a memorandum, I would also report that Mir has used bad-sharāb , bad-sharābī in several places, but it is not found in any dictionary. Janab Barkati has, relying on Asi, given as a first meaning 'one who has drunk wine and would not remain in control of himself'. But this meaning doesn't seem to be correct, as is clear from the verse above. Apparently that person is called bad-sharāb who would pass his life without balance and without discrimination, whose behavior and character would have no dignity. Thus Mir's verse in the first divan [{83,3}]:

thā bad-sharāb sāqī kitnā kih rāt mai se
maiñ ne jo hāth kheñchā un ne kaṭār kheñchā

[how 'ill-behaved' the Saqi was, that last night
when I drew my hand back from the wine, he drew out a dagger]

Sauda too has said,

bulbul chaman meñ kis kī haiñ yih bad-sharābiyāñ
ṭūṭī paṛī haiñ ġhunchoñ kī sārī gulābiyāñ

[Nightingale, in the garden whose are these 'bad behaviors'?
all the rose-flagons of the branches are lying broken]

FWP:

SETS
MOTIFS == LIFE/DEATH
NAMES
TERMS

The 'kya effect' can be used to make the verse more intriguing by turning the first line into a question ('Did we really endure so many griefs and show so much patience? -- Maybe not, maybe we didn't even live long enough for all that suffering?'). Or it could be turned into a negative exclamation ('As if we endured lots of griefs, and showed lots of patience! We didn't even live long enough for all that!').

If we consider the Steingass definition of muhaiyā (given above), it seems to include not only the idea of being oneself ready or prepared (the sense that SRF endorses), but also the idea of preparing other things (equipment, necessities), as in the modern idiom he presents. So the second line could of course be read as reporting that the speaker had used his two days of life to prepare himself for dying (2a); but it could also be read as reporting that the speaker had accumulated during those two days a full supply of griefs endured and long-sufferings manifested, so that (the experiences of) those two days represented the 'arranged, available' equipment for the process of dying (2b).

But really, no matter how it's tweaked, the verse still isn't all that exciting.