With the matrices below, apparently $\{u_k = -\frac i2 \lambda_k| k=1,2,\cdots,8\}$ forms a basis of $\mathfrak{su}(3)$
How could that be true? $-\frac i2 \lambda_1$ shouldn't even be an element of $\mathfrak{su}(3)$, it isn't hermitian.
With the matrices below, apparently $\{u_k = -\frac i2 \lambda_k| k=1,2,\cdots,8\}$ forms a basis of $\mathfrak{su}(3)$
How could that be true? $-\frac i2 \lambda_1$ shouldn't even be an element of $\mathfrak{su}(3)$, it isn't hermitian.
The problem is explained here as follows: the $8$-dimensional real Lie algebra $\mathfrak{su}(3)$ has a basis $\lambda_1,\ldots ,\lambda_8$ as above, consisiting of Hermitian matrices. However, the Lie bracket of this subspace of $3\times 3$ matrices is not given by the commutator $AB-BA$, because the commutator of two Hermitian matrices is not Hermitian again in general. Of course, we could insist on a different Lie bracket given by $[A,B]=i(AB-BA)$. However, a more popular solution is to pass to anti-Hermitian matrices, which gives an isomorphic Lie algebra, but this time with the more natural Lie bracket $[A,B]=AB-BA$. For a similar discussion on MSE, see here.