"The most famous example of this justice is in the legal trial of a Jew who stole the coat of armour of Imam Ali (ra) as he was travelling to a battle. The judge Shurayh made no exception for Ali (ra) even though he was the Khaleefah, a Muslim and also off to fight in a battle so was in desperate need of his armour. Shurayh ruled in favour of the Jew and accepted his testimony in court. Full details of the trial can be read here." (c) abu

The statement 3 of the paragraph contradicts to the statement one.
Since Shurayh ruled in favour of the Jew it is lie to say that he stole the armour from the Imam, which makes the muslim Imam a lier.

Was the Imam punished for braking islamic rule of prohibiting a muslim to lie? What was the punishment?

"No I don't understand the supposed contradiction.

All that Tallow claimed was that Imam Ali (ra) was supposedly a liar. That does not alter whatsoever the fact that testimony of non-Muslims is quite acceptable under Shari'ah law, acceptable enough that the Muslim head of state (As Ali was Caliph at this time) could be ruled against, based solely on the word of a non-Muslim." (c) abu

This shia anecdotal story also says that the judge who ruled against the imam ali was punished but that is beside the point too because the case is not about allowing the Jew to be a witness but about disallowing the military ruler to use his close kin as witnesses for his case.

Why would the judge be punished?

freediver wrote on Feb 19^th, 2009 at 10:28pm:

Why would the judge be punished?

Quote:

Shurayh said, “sons’ testimonies for their fathers are not valid nor are these of servants, for they will witness in your favor.” Imam `Ali said, “Woe to you, Shurayh! You have certainly made several mistakes. Firstly, I am your leader and you obey Allah because you obey me and you know that what I say is not false. Secondly, you claimed that Qanbar and Husayn witnessed in my favor. The punishment for this is to judge among the Jew for three days.”