Clarify disinformations about Karmapa | No settlement
Disinformation
On July 7, 2022, German blogger Tenzin Peljor (also known as Tenpel or Michael Jackel) published an anonymous article making baseless claims about the Karmapa and DNA evidence. The article cited no sources and offered no proof, yet it caused significant harm to the Karmapa’s reputation.
Then, on January 9, 2023, he did it again—posting another anonymous article with no evidence or credible sources. This time, he falsely claimed that the Karmapa and Vikki Han had reached an out-of-court settlement involving millions of dollars in hush money, and that Han was legally forbidden from revealing any DNA-related information to the public.
In response, investigative journalist and academic Rob Hogendoorn wrote three concise articles analyzing the blogger’s disinformation. His insights cut to the heart of the matter and offer a well-informed rebuttal to the false claims. The links to his articles are provided below.
『Hardly An Elevating Sight, But Quite Enlightening』
~~~~~~~~~~~
The Hidden Agenda
“Bodhicharya is a non-profit educational and cultural association founded by Ringu Tulku Rinpoche in 1997. Rinpoche is the official representative of His Holiness the 17th Karmapa in Europe and the founder of the Karmapa Foundation in Europe.” — Bodhicharya
Tenzin Peljor, who was once a resident monk at Bodhicharya, was eventually asked to leave. In fact, Peljor himself admitted that every group he joined ended up removing him. According to Religion Unplugged (by Tenzin Tsagong, October 14, 2022), Ringu Tulku Rinpoche described Peljor by saying, “He believes in criticizing and saying bad things about almost every lama.” To many members, he was seen as a troublemaker—more interested in stirring up drama than sincerely following the spiritual path.
Today, Peljor positions himself as a voice of justice for the three women involved in the allegations, often speaking louder and more aggressively than they do. He continues to relentlessly attack the Karmapa and the Karma Kagyu lineage using unverified claims and hearsay. Given his troubled history with the Karma Kagyu, it’s fair to question whether his motives are truly pure—or whether they are driven by a hidden agenda of personal revenge disguised as public advocacy.
So the question remains: how credible are his opinions and accusations regarding the Karmapa?
 |
| Source: FPMT |
Overestimating One’s Abilities
In the comment section of his blog, Tenpel wrote: “He (the Dalai Lama) approved a Karmapa candidate based on the requests of Gyaltsab and Tai Situ, as far as I know.”
This statement seriously oversimplifies—and misrepresents—the recognition process of the 17th Karmapa. The Karmapa is the second-highest spiritual leader in Tibetan Buddhism, and his recognition is of profound importance to the Tibetan people.
Before the 17th Karmapa was found, His Holiness the Dalai Lama shared that he had a vivid dream in which someone pointed out the place where the Karmapa had been born. He later explained the unique and careful process he used to identify the true Karmapa. Rather than relying on just one or two conventional signs, His Holiness used a special method of verification, received a clear and positive response, and became fully confident in the recognition.
Therefore, it is inaccurate to suggest that the Dalai Lama’s decision was merely based on requests from Gyaltsab Rinpoche and Tai Situ Rinpoche. His Holiness took the initiative and made the recognition based on his own spiritual insight and careful discernment.
The following two videos feature the 14th Dalai Lama himself explaining his dream and the process of recognizing the 17th Karmapa.
『The Dalai Lama's Prophecy Dream about the Karmapa’s Rebirth』
『Dalai Lama Talks His Recognition of the 17th Karmapa』
In a comment on his blog, Tenpel wrote: “He (the Dalai Lama) approved a Karmapa candidate based on the requests of Gyaltsab and Tai Situ, as far as I know.”
This statement not only oversimplifies but seriously misrepresents the recognition of the 17th Karmapa. As the second-highest spiritual leader in Tibetan Buddhism, identifying the true Karmapa is a matter of profound importance. If, as Tenpel implies, His Holiness the Dalai Lama approved the candidate without independent verification, simply based on the recommendations of two Rinpoches, it would call into question the credibility of the entire reincarnation system—a tradition central to Tibetan Buddhism for centuries.
However, that’s not what happened.
Before the 17th Karmapa was identified, His Holiness publicly stated that he had a dream in which a figure pointed out the exact birthplace of the Karmapa. Later, he explained that he undertook a thorough and traditional process to confirm the recognition—not relying on a single sign or report, but drawing from multiple sources and using unique, traditional methods of verification. His final decision was made with clarity and confidence.
As stated in the Special Official Notification released by the Office of the Dalai Lama on July 23, 1992:
“His Holiness the Dalai Lama granted his final seal of approval and recognition to the 17th Gyalwa Karmapa—not randomly or hastily for any reason, but after satisfying himself by means of hearing a series of reports from all those concerned; studying and paying due consideration to the overall matter; and reconfirming the final indications with exclusive traditional examinations.”
— Source: Confirmation by the Dalai Lama – The Kindness of the Dalai Lama
To imply otherwise is not just incorrect—it underestimates the wisdom of His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama and the spiritual process involved. An ordinary person with limited understanding, who overestimates their own grasp of Tibetan tradition, has no ground to challenge the legitimacy of such a sacred and carefully guided recognition.
No Settlement
Why did Vikki Han feel confident enough to sue the Karmapa based on false evidence? The answer is straightforward—she had a plan.
In her own Facebook post from January 2019, titled Plan for Destroying the Karmapa, Han detailed the group’s strategy:
“The headlines are all well thought out. Soon, the media coverage will be overwhelming.
Sister said: If this kind of news comes out, who could turn around a hopeless situation?
The trial files will always be available for public inquiry online.
Whether he did it or not is his business—the court will enforce it.
His name and identity are worth over $10 million.
The lawyer estimated the case could bring at least $50 million.
My sister will not settle with him.”
(Note: “Sister” refers to Vikki Han.)
Their intention was clear: to generate media attention, exploit public assumptions, and damage the Karmapa’s reputation. They understood that most people would believe that a lawsuit must be based on solid evidence—why else would someone sue? This psychological manipulation was a core part of their plan.
After gaining widespread press coverage, the lawsuit was quietly dropped. Then came the false claim that the Karmapa had paid millions to settle the case out of court—an allegation that was never proven and contradicts the actual court records.
Let’s look at the timeline and facts:
- May 17, 2021: Vikki Han filed a lawsuit in Canada seeking child and spousal support. The judge accepted the case and formally began proceedings. Both parties were then bound by law not to publicly discuss the case or make public accusations, in order to protect the legal process.
- May 19, 2021: Western media widely reported on the Canadian lawsuit.
- Early June 2021: Han’s team hired a prominent New York lawyer to produce a defamatory video and website targeting the Karmapa—violating the legal protocol that both parties had agreed to.
- Mid-2022: The lawsuit in Canada had progressed far enough that withdrawing it would have required agreement from both the judge and the Karmapa’s legal team. A simple dismissal was no longer an option.
- September 14, 2022: Han unconditionally withdrew her New York lawsuit against Karma Triyana Dharmachakra Monastery (KTD) “without prejudice.” The video and website slandering the Karmapa were taken down by her lawyer.
The term “without prejudice” is important. According to legal practice (as outlined by The Rothman Law Firm):
“If an action is discontinued with prejudice, it is terminated permanently and cannot be refiled.
If it is discontinued without prejudice, the plaintiff may refile the lawsuit in the future.”
So if there had been a financial settlement, it would make no sense for the defendant to agree to a “without prejudice” dismissal. Why pay a settlement and still allow the plaintiff the right to sue again?
In a normal legal settlement, both parties sign a detailed mutual agreement known as a global release, confirming that no further legal action will be taken. The case is then dismissed with prejudice, permanently ending the dispute. Anything less leaves both parties exposed—particularly the defendant.
Here is the actual notice submitted by Han:
NOTICE OF DISCONTINUING ACTION
“I, Vikki Hui Xin Han, hereby affirm that the above-entitled action is hereby discontinued as against Karma Triyana Dharmachakra Monastery, without prejudice and without costs to any party, and this notice may be filed with the Clerk of the Court without further notice.”
This official statement confirms that no settlement occurred.
If Han had received compensation or signed a settlement agreement, the case would have been closed with prejudice. But since she dismissed the case without prejudice, it proves that no such settlement happened.
 |
| Source: New York court documents |
“Ethically Barred”? By Whom?
In a statement to Tricycle on November 18, 2022, Dr. Ann Olivarius, who represented Vikki Han in the New York proceedings, said she was “ethically barred” from commenting on the case or providing further information about why the lawsuit was withdrawn.
One might wonder: why use such a serious phrase—“ethically barred”—instead of simply saying “no comment”? Who exactly has the authority to bar her from speaking?
In the U.S., attorneys are subject to rules of professional conduct set by state bar associations. For lawyers practicing in New York, oversight comes from entities like the New York State Bar Association and the Attorney Grievance Committees. These bodies have the power to investigate ethical violations and can impose restrictions or disciplinary measures.
Interestingly, during the same period, Dr. Olivarius’s law firm brought in another attorney with similar experience and qualifications. That move has led some to speculate that she may have been implicated, in some way, by actions taken on behalf of Han’s team—particularly if those actions crossed ethical boundaries.
Han’s Canadian Lawsuit: Still Ongoing
Let’s be clear: Vikki Han’s lawsuit in Canada is still ongoing. The judge formally accepted the case on May 17, 2021, and it remains in progress today. There’s no point in denying this fact or trying to obscure it through media narratives. Eventually, a judgment will be handed down—and when it is, the truth will come to light.
So why all the noise and urgency in the meantime? Why try to pressure the Karmapa into public statements or DNA disclosures while the case is still active in court? Justice is coming—just be patient.
An “Independent Investigation”? A Red Herring
Blogger Tenpel recently wrote:
“Can we agree that the Karmapa himself can perfectly settle the case by either confirming or rejecting the allegations and by making the DNA test result public or by encouraging an independent investigation?”
This statement reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of the legal process. An independent investigation is typically a private inquiry conducted before a legal case is filed. It’s informal, non-binding, and designed to resolve internal disputes or workplace issues discreetly.
But Han didn’t opt for an independent inquiry. She went much further. Her team hired one of the most prominent law firms in Canada and filed an official lawsuit in court. She even submitted a DNA paternity report (claiming it was taken from alleged “underwear”) and supported her claims with a sworn affidavit in an application to amend her original complaint.
In other words, Han was confident enough to go through formal legal channels—so what would be the point of the Karmapa now engaging in a non-binding, independent investigation? That would be putting the cart before the horse. The proper, neutral third party—the judge—is already reviewing the case. Once the judgment is made, it will speak for itself.
It’s also worth noting that the alleged messages from the Karmapa’s “LINE account” are cited across multiple women’s claims. If Han’s Canadian lawsuit is proven to be fabricated, it will likely undermine the credibility of all three women’s allegations at once.
The Power of Hearsay
Tenpel also wrote:
“I heard from Kagyu followers—who believe the accusations are correct—that the lineage is more important. Basically, it must continue as it is; otherwise, everything they value would be lost.”
This is a classic example of unverified hearsay. Who exactly are these followers? What are their names? Where is the evidence?
As committed disciples of the 17th Karmapa, we are far more familiar with the sentiments within the Karma Kagyu community. And we can say this unequivocally: our community does not believe the allegations are true. We believe the Karmapa has been deliberately targeted by a coordinated campaign to destroy his reputation. And we are waiting calmly, faithfully, for the judgment in Canada that will vindicate him.
This is the consensus among Karma Kagyu practitioners:
“The truth will come out when the court investigates it.”
Be Careful What You Wish For
The team supporting the three women has done everything they can to get their allegations into the media. They’ve sought press coverage, pushed the story online, and demanded that the Karmapa make public statements.
Now, this German blogger seems equally obsessed with pressuring the Karmapa to publicly discuss the allegations or DNA results—even as the legal case is still pending.
But don’t be anxious. Be patient. When the day comes—and the Karmapa wins the lawsuit—he will make a public statement. And when that day comes, all the major media outlets in both the West and Asia will report it extensively. The three women’s names and faces will be tied to those reports. The story will finally be told—but not the way they had hoped.
And yes, perhaps the truth behind the so-called “DNA test” will also be revealed. Perhaps even the origin of the disinformation will come to light.
As the old saying goes:
“Be careful what you wish for—lest it come true.”
