WHERE IS THAT TREASURE?

There are some lines here in which proper English (as well as sense) is abandoned for the sake of insuring that a certain metric is maintained and which, therefore, is likely to take anyone who wants to read something that is well written, conceptually clear,  and that does not abuse grammar right of of your piece.

For instance, this line

"the wealth of life which we look for in this short lease."

contains deixis and is likely to make a reader ask "what lease are you talking about?".

This line

"but wants to reach the aim for which wise men are born."


is question begging in that it claims that human life is ruled by predestination and does not make clear, even by implication,  what the aim is that  wise men are supposedly born for, even if people are born for an "aim".

This line

"I've spent long time among my books to know the way."


Needs to read "I've spent A long time among my books to know the way" to be good English.  More importantly, its meaning remains unclear since there is no specification of what the way is that you are talking about or what "the way" entails.

These lines are a garbled statements

"They've rendered me without the wealth most people seek.
I try to live my social life, but none sees me
as gold and silver can make men all shine like stars."


since you need to have written "as THE gold and silver THAT can make all men shine like stars"  for what you are attempting to say to make sense.  And I'm not sure how no one seeing you as "gold" or as shining like stars (a cliche) prevents you from having a social life.  Most people who have one are not seen as gold  or as stars by the majority of other people.

And this claim is highly puzzling

"I stick to books, to pens and verse, but l am lost.
They may endow me what a few can wish and trust."

since what it is that few can wish for and trust is unclear. And how you know that books etc. will [i]not[/i] endow anyone but you with what is  wished for and is trustworthy is beyond me.

Finally, this claim

"But l still find that life on earth is a great chance"

creates conceptual problems since you've never said that you had previously found life a great chance (as your "still" indicates you had,  nor do you say, as you should, what this chance is.

and this note

"for what can shine more than dead gold, or goldless verse."

contains a solecism (there is no such word as "goldless") and it is a rather silly question, since almost anything does for "dead gold"  (whatever that is)  and goldless verse do not shine.

Sorry,  but this is another example of your "all tell/no show" "I am so profound" style and it really doesn't tell much that is comprehensible

What is the purpose behind this mis titled piece?

Dear Baldwin,
I'll answer the first question about the word LEASE. You consider it contains deixis. What do l mean by it? Look up the word LEASE in MERRIAM WEBSTER'S COLLEGIATE DICTIONARY, you will find A CONTINUANCE OR OPPORTUNITY FOR CONTINUANCE. Then you find A NEW LEASE OF LIFE. I think this makes it quite clear. If you consider the conceptualization of the word in the poem, the meaning of the word LEASE becomes quite clear.
The other points you raised are not worthy to be discussed. Sorry to say so.

Here's what I find at MW regarding the meaning of the word.:

lease noun
\ ˈlēs  \
Definition of lease (Entry 1 of 2)
1 : a contract by which one conveys real estate, equipment, or facilities for a specified term and for a specified rent
took out a five-year lease on the house
also : the act of such conveyance or the term for which it is made
2 : a piece of land or property that is leased
3 : a continuance or opportunity for continuance
// a new lease on life.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lease#examples

So I think that you have misrepresented what MW "shows" me.  It does NOT show that "a new lease of (?) life" is what "lease" means or conveys, even in your awkward context. .  In fact, when it notes how it conveys the idea of the opportunity of the continuance of life,  it does so by indicating that it has to be used in specific (not implied) conjunction with the words "new", "on",  and "life"  -- which it is most certainly not in your submission.

Thank you for characterizing the points I made rather than dealing with them, let alone providing any evidence what so ever that your claim about their nature is true.

This is a sure sign that you are not skilled/equipped enough to do so.

And for what it's worth, there is no clear "conceptualization" (what ever that means) of "lease" within your piece.  If you meant to say "lease on life"  you should have done so.  

Nor did I say that the word contains deixis (and your saying that I did is putting words in my mouth as well as a sign that you don't read carefully).  I said the expression "THIS lease" -- which, by its very nature of being unmarked, presupposes that it is immediately and transparently clear as to WHICH lease you are referring to, is a deictic one.  Perhaps you need to familiarize yourself with just what deixis is and how it leads to the sort of question I said your line does.

One question, Joseph.  Do you think you are incapable of writing poorly?

Dear Baldwin,
You can look up, "LEASE OF LIFE" in any dictionary you like. If you are not convinced, l am. I really don't have much time to waste on such subjects. I think that my English is good enough to guide me safely in what l am doing. I don't want to speak about what you call your poem. Please review it. For me it is not poetry. When you review it, you will approve what l have said if you know anything about poetry and you are honest with yourself. Thank you for your concern.

Why you think I am disputing what "lease of (sic) life" means is beyond me.  And what dictionaries show is that it means "A fresh start; renewed vigor and good health"  "a chance to continue living or to become successful or popular again"  
 
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/a%20new%20lease%20on%20life.    
   
 It has nothing to do with how short life is let alone whether one has enough time to find life's treasures.,    
   
The question is whether you have actually used that expression, whether "this short lease" possesses this meaning,   and whether the way you write really conveys clearly what you think you are saying.  
   
And you are once again  characterizing the points I made about the  various lines in your piece rather than dealing with them, let alone providing any evidence what so ever that your claim about their nature is true.

To say without demonstrating that they are a waste of time is a dodge typical of those who cannot defend their claims and who don't want to admit that they cannot do so.

Dear Baldwin,
You want always to deal in my poetry. Let's deal a little bit in yours. By your honour, do you call the lines you wrote to me  a poem? Please review it and tell me.

Leaving aside the fact that the expression is "deal with" not "deal in",  the above is another dodge of your responsibilities to support the claims you make.  The issue here is whether you have written well.  How I write has no bearing on that matter.

Hello Baldwin,
First, may l know what nationality you are?

Another dodge.  Where I am from has nothing to do with whether what I have said about your piece is valid.