🔴 2025 Update | Unmasking Wu Hang Yee (鄔幸兒): False Claims Against the 17th Karmapa Revealed
Wu Hang Yee Smears the Karmapa Again — Why We Choose to Speak Out
In March of this year, a netizen brought to our attention that Wu Hang Yee had once again made false accusations against His Holiness the 17th Karmapa. They suggested we should take note of the situation. At the time, the controversy surrounding her centered mainly on issues related to her personal sexual conduct. Initially, we had no intention of getting involved.
However, she repeatedly and deliberately dragged the Karmapa into these matters stemming from her own emotional entanglements, making the situation impossible to ignore.
We responded by publishing just two posts on Facebook, clarifying her fabricated claims about a so-called “30-million-dollar fake Karmapa mala” and the two accompanying photos. These posts were not actively shared in any other Facebook groups. Instead, some group admins reached out to ask why we hadn’t shared them more widely. We replied that we initially believed few people would be interested in Wu Hang Yee’s personal scandals, and thus saw no need to amplify the issue further.
On March 17, 2025, Wu Hang Yee appeared with her current boyfriend on a livestream chat show. During the broadcast, the two not only discussed her “five-night stand” experiences, but also repeatedly dragged His Holiness the 17th Karmapa into her personal relationship entanglements, making public false accusations against him. In the days that followed, her boyfriend’s YouTube channel, “阿門Amen,” released several related videos, further escalating this wave of attacks.
 |
| Image Credit: YouTube/阿門 |
 |
| Image Credit: YouTube/阿門 |
According to reports, during Wu Hang Yee’s brief five-night relationship with a former boyfriend, she allegedly told him that the Karmapa had deceived her. The man even claimed to have had a meal with the Karmapa. In reality, however, His Holiness the 17th Karmapa, Ogyen Trinley Dorje, has never set foot in Hong Kong. These claims are highly likely to be referring to someone else entirely.
Wu Hang Yee is merely one of millions of followers of the Karmapa, not his disciple. The Karmapa does not know her, nor does he have any connection whatsoever to her sexual controversies or to any of the individuals involved. There is absolutely no personal relationship between them.
We mention Wu Hang Yee’s sexual scandals in this article not out of curiosity or to pass judgment on her personal conduct, but because she has repeatedly fabricated and spread false information about the Karmapa within the context of these private entanglements. Without setting the record straight, it is easy for bystanders to be misled, mistakenly projecting her personal experiences onto the Karmapa.
To prevent the continued distortion of truth and to protect the faith of those who might otherwise be shaken by such rumors, we believe it is necessary to present the full picture and restore clarity.
Faced with these recurring falsehoods, we have given the matter serious thought and concluded that silence no longer serves to stop the slander. If we remain quiet, more unsuspecting netizens may be misled by her claims, unwittingly echoing slanderous speech and thereby accumulating negative karma — the consequences of which could be far-reaching.
Structure of the Article:
This article is divided into two main sections:
Part One: Wu Hang Yee’s Renewed Controversy
Part Two: Clarifying the Recent False Allegations Against the Karmapa
In response to the multiple accusations made by Wu Hang Yee, we provide a detailed analysis and clarification of each point.
Additionally, we present several new and compelling facts and pieces of evidence. The clarifications are organized into eight key topics:
1. Online Sexual Content
2. Verifying the Authenticity of the Karmapa’s Account
3. Allegation of Conspiracy to Defraud 10 Million USD
4. The 30-Million-USD Red Coral Mala Incident
5. Wu Hang Yee’s Allegations of Three Sexual Encounters
6. Analysis of the Authenticity of Circulating Photos
7. Debunking Rumors: Did the Karmapa Not Take Monastic Vows? Is He Allowed to Have a Girlfriend?
8. Not Bullying, But Exposing the Truth: A Response to Amen’s Accusations Against “The Truth Website”
————
After the incident involving the Karmapa emerged, online attacks against him were not limited to just the three women. Even more concerning was that the mastermind behind the scenes had long embedded internet trolls into two high-traffic websites that consistently follow this case. For years, these individuals hurled vile and obscene insults at the Karmapa. Whenever someone spoke up in his defense, they were immediately met with malicious and degrading attacks. These trolls even attempted to harass our Truth Website, but all of them have since been blocked.
However, since mid-March of last year, these trolls have suddenly disappeared without a trace and have not reappeared to this day. We suspect that the mastermind may have called off the online smear campaign against the Karmapa. Frankly speaking, Wu Hang Yee’s behavior bears a striking resemblance to that of a “professional internet troll.” Over the years, she has consistently published posts and produced videos filled with intense false accusations and defamation against the Karmapa. Her methods are systematic and sustained, seemingly designed to gain attention and resources.
Although we do not possess direct evidence that she was paid to do this, her overall pattern of behavior, her ties to certain factions, and her previous collaboration with Vikki Han Huixin—a person we explicitly identified as a spy—provide ample reason to suspect that she has long been supported by financial or organizational backing. After all, it is difficult for an ordinary individual to carry out such a calculated and long-term smear campaign. For years, she has practically treated attacking the Karmapa as her “full-time occupation.” This is no coincidence, nor something that could be sustained purely by personal emotion.
Now, if the mastermind has indeed cut off funding, then Wu Hang Yee’s financial backing would have ended as well. If she truly profited from this over the years, then what came quickly has now quickly vanished. With her old path no longer viable, she must now look for a new one. And her usual tactic is to once again invoke the Karmapa’s name—leveraging it to boost her own profile and continue the same familiar scheme of self-serving gain. At the same time, she poses as a victim to elicit sympathy, in an attempt to garner more attention and support.
(Note: We have indeed clearly stated that Vikki Han—a Chinese woman from Canada—was involved in espionage activities and played a role in manipulating public opinion in this case. However, we have never accused Wu Hang Yee of being of the same nature. It was Wu Hang Yee herself who took that label upon herself—how flattering she is to herself!)
Wu Hang Yee stirs up controversy again
Wu Hang Yee and Mr. Hui’s Five-Night Affair
After losing her original source of income, Wu Hang Yee began searching online for a new “target.” Her first choice was a 76-year-old retiree—Mr. Hui, a former Chief Investigator at Hong Kong’s Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC). He had published a book and was moderately well-known in Hong Kong due to his professional background and life experience. He enjoyed a comfortable lifestyle, employed two domestic helpers at home, and had been widowed for three years. In retirement, he started running a YouTube channel where he shared stories from his time at the ICAC.
Wu Hang Yee quickly became a regular presence in Mr. Hui’s livestream chatroom, actively leaving comments and interacting with him. Before long, she established contact and arranged to meet him in person. According to Mr. Hui’s own account during a livestream, the two began an intimate relationship on the very day they first met, which lasted for five days—what he later referred to as a “five-night affair.”
Mr. Hui stated that their first meeting included dinner together, during which Wu Hang Yee gazed at him with deep affection, giving off an impression of innocence and gentleness. After dinner, the two attended a small concert hosted by one of Mr. Hui’s friends. Reportedly, during the event, Wu Hang Yee took the initiative to hold Mr. Hui’s hand, quickly intensifying the connection between them. On the other hand, according to Wu Hang Yee’s current boyfriend, Amen, she had intimate relations with Mr. Hui on the very first day they met and even took a bath with him.
 |
| Image Credit: YouTube/Mr.Hui |
Wu Hang Yee told Mr. Hui that her mother wished to meet him, so the three of them arranged to go out together the following day. While riding in a taxi to a certain location, Wu suddenly claimed she was feeling unwell and asked the driver to stop. When the driver did not comply immediately, Mr. Hui stepped in and got into a dispute with him. After getting out of the taxi, Wu collapsed and sat down by the roadside. Alarmed by the situation, Mr. Hui quickly contacted his domestic helper for assistance and suggested taking Wu to the hospital. However, Wu’s mother remained calm and said they should respect Wu’s wishes. Shortly afterward, Wu regained consciousness on her own and firmly refused medical treatment. Since Mr. Hui’s residence was nearby, he suggested they go back to his home to rest, and the three of them proceeded to his house together.
 |
| Image Credit: YouTube/ Mr.Hui |
After arriving at Mr. Hui’s residence, Wu Hang Yee’s mother displayed some rather striking behavior—she inspected each room in the house and asked the domestic helper about the purpose and usage of each one. Shortly afterward, she left on her own, leaving her daughter alone in the home of a man she had just recently met.
After Wu Hang Yee moved into Mr. Hui’s home, their relationship quickly intensified and soon developed into a romantic partnership, during which they engaged in intimate relations multiple times almost daily. According to Mr. Hui, Wu Hang Yee repeatedly asked for financial assistance during their time together and openly expressed her strong desire to get married.
She also confided in Mr. Hui, claiming that she had once been in a relationship with the 17th Karmapa, including an intimate involvement, and that she had been deceived during the course of that relationship. Additionally, she frequently criticized lawyer Mary Jean Reimer, who manages the “Buddhist Alert” Facebook page, and pleaded with Mr. Hui to speak out on her behalf by producing a video condemning the lawyer and seeking “justice” for her.
Not long after, Mr. Hui complied with her request and published a video in her defense, which consequently drew Mary Jean Reimer into the controversy as well.
However, the relationship lasted only five days before it ended. Mr. Hui briefly traveled abroad, during which Wu Hang Yee left his home and later claimed that she was pregnant—an allegation that was ultimately proven false. Mr. Hui revealed that he had only given Wu Hang Yee HKD 1,000(US$130), which she later passed on to his domestic helper, possibly as a gesture of dissatisfaction.
Thus, this short and dramatic relationship came to an end.
Later, when Wu Hang Yee recounted this experience to her new boyfriend, Amen, she claimed that Mr. Hui had a preference for one of his domestic helpers and, without any substantive evidence, further alleged that the two may have had an improper relationship. Amen chose to believe her, which deepened his negative impression of Mr. Hui.
Wu Hang Yee’s Latest Targets: From “Mr. Hui” to “Amen”
After her “five-night affair” with Mr. Hui came to an end, Wu Hang Yee quickly established a new online connection with a man named “Amen.” Reportedly, Wu was the one who initiated contact and expressed a desire to meet. After their first meeting, the two quickly hit it off, and Wu soon moved into Amen’s residence. As their time together grew, their relationship developed rapidly, and within less than a month, they had established themselves as an engaged couple.
Amen described Wu Hang Yee as a very simple and pure woman. He expressed his willingness to take good care of her—cooking meals, doing laundry, washing dishes, and cleaning the bathroom for her. Given her current financial difficulties, he also offered to provide monetary support within his means.
Amen is a senior who is divorced and single. He spent many years accompanying and caring for his mother, and has been living alone since her passing. According to what he shared in a livestream, he is currently taking mental health medication.
During their relationship, the couple attended social gatherings together. After one such event, a popular content creator friend of Amen posted a group photo online, prompting some internet users to recognize Wu Hang Yee’s identity and spark heated discussion.
In a livestream on his YouTube channel, Amen mentioned that Wu had gifted him tokens of love, including a “mala personally given by the Karmapa, worth thirty million US dollars” and a “watch belonging to the Karmapa.” He said these items were extremely precious to him. Misled by Wu, Amen believed the story and repeatedly referenced content from her memoirs during his livestreams—particularly the claim that the Karmapa once demanded she kneel before him—and launched harsh criticisms against the Karmapa. Additionally, Amen made scathing remarks about Mr. Hui and Mary Jean Reimer, which sparked controversy and debate among viewers.
 |
| Image Credit: YouTube/阿門 |
 |
| Image Credit: YouTube/阿門 |
Escalation of the Incident: Wu Hang Yee and Amen Get Involved
Wu Hang Yee and Mr. Hui’s “five-night affair” was originally a private matter. However, Wu chose to publicize it through an online video, triggering a wave of public attention. In the video, she used three crystals to symbolically represent the genitalia of three men she claimed to have been intimate with—explicitly naming Mr. Hui, her Bhutanese boyfriend, and the Karmapa. She even went so far as to compare their sizes in the video, sparking widespread attention and controversy.
 |
| Image Credit: YouTube/Wu Hang Yee |
However, Mr. Hui later released an apology video, admitting that he had indeed had an intimate relationship with Wu Hang Yee and stating that he should not have developed a personal relationship with a fan. But just as the situation seemed to settle, Wu’s new boyfriend, Amen, publicly intervened. He claimed that Wu was “mentally impaired” and accused Mr. Hui of potentially breaking the law by having a sexual relationship with her, even threatening to file a lawsuit and vowing to ruin Mr. Hui’s reputation.
Faced with these sudden accusations and legal threats, the 76-year-old Mr. Hui appeared to panic and subsequently retracted his earlier admission, denying that any relationship had occurred. This reversal only added confusion and mystery to the already chaotic situation.
In his video, Mr. Hui warned Amen: “Be careful with Wu Hang Yee—she’s not an ordinary person and may have multiple personality issues.” He urged Amen to stay alert, pointing out that Wu was now wearing gold and silver jewelry, which he believed she couldn’t afford given her financial situation. He emphasized, “You must be cautious!”
The incident sparked widespread discussion online. Many netizens questioned why Wu repeatedly approached older, single men and speculated about her true motives. Numerous commenters also advised Amen: “Don’t let love blind you—stay rational!”
Betraying Kindness: The Entanglement Between Wu Hang Yee and Lawyer Mary Jean Reimer
In early 2019, shortly after the Karmapa incident erupted, Wu Hang Yee immediately took to her Facebook page to publicly accuse the Karmapa and reposted her allegations to the “Buddhist Alert” community platform. At the time, lawyer Mary Jean Reimer was caught off guard but generously offered Wu a platform to speak, allowing her accusations against the Karmapa to rapidly spread within this high-traffic Buddhist community.
Wu even claimed she intended to file legal charges against the Karmapa, and Mary Jean Reimer offered assistance, requesting that Wu organize her evidence and submit it to her law firm for processing. However, more than two months passed without Wu providing any substantial proof. During this period, members of “Buddhist Alert” began to express doubts about Wu’s statements, and dissatisfaction within the community grew steadily. Eventually, Mary Jean Reimer questioned whether Wu was merely using the group as a platform for self-promotion. Offended by this suggestion, Wu angrily left the group.
In a Facebook post, Mary Jean Reimer wrote:
“It has now been over two months since Ms. Wu Hang-Yee publicly announced her intention to take legal action regarding her allegations against the Karmapa. To date, however, no legal steps have been taken.
Given this lack of follow-through, the administrator of Buddhism Alert has decided that, until Ms. Wu submits the relevant information to the Legal Affairs Office as previously stated, posts from her containing similar content will no longer be approved for publication on this platform.”
Captured below is a comment exchange between Wu Hang Yee and Mary Jean Reiner on the same Facebook post.
Wu Hang Yee: Oh. Dear admin, please delete this post. I published it by mistake. Thank you.
Mary Jean Reiner: Wu Hang Yee, this is a post from your own page, and you asked Buddhist Alert to repost it. The post is still visible on your page and hasn’t been deleted. Also, has any legal action been taken? A person of integrity follows through on their words.
Wu Hang Yee: I’m still preparing, as there are many factors to consider. Thank you.
Wu Hang Yee: I might have accidentally requested a Buddhist Alert to repost it. My apologies.
User A: When the time comes, it’ll be another “accidental block”!
User B: So determined? To be continued… Walk the talk!
Wu Hang Yee: I sincerely apologize. Please delete my post. I thought I was posting on my own Facebook page.
Mary Jean Reiner: Wu Hang Yee, is it that you don’t want people to know that Buddhist Alert refused to repost your content?
Wu Hang Yee: It’s fine if they refuse to repost. I had already declined to reveal these truths about seven weeks ago. But now, I just want to use my experience to testify on behalf of Jane Huang.
Mary Jean Reiner: Whether these are really truths is just your side of the story. If we want fairness, the matter should go through legal procedures.
Mary Jean Reiner: We all believed you were willing to handle this through legal channels — but it’s been two months, and so far, there’s only been talk with no action.
Wu Hang Yee: Can legal procedures really be trusted?
We Hang Yee: Sorry, I need time to think it over carefully.
Mary Jean Reiner: A person’s integrity is extremely important.
We Hang Yee: Right now, I hope the Karmapa will sue me.
Mary Jean Reiner: Your version has already been publicly shared very clearly. What exactly is your ultimate goal? Is it just to vent? To take revenge? Or to benefit the public? For those who don’t believe you, only legal action can support your claims.
Mary Jean Reiner: Wu Hang Yee, your original statement was that you would file a lawsuit — not that the Karmapa should sue you.
Wu Hang Yee: Filing a lawsuit requires many conditions. I don’t have those, so I can only wait for the Karmapa to sue me.
Wu Hang Yee: Mary Jean Reiner, what did I click to cause this? Can I delete the request I made for Buddhist Alert to repost this?
Mary Jean Reiner: Wu Hang Yee, I can help you leave [the group].
User B: Wu Hang Yee Fine! Then just keep going in circles!
 |
| Conversation between Mary Jean Reiner & Wu Hang Yee |
But the matter did not end there. According to Mary Jean Reimer, Wu Hang-Yee later launched a retaliatory campaign against her using multiple fake accounts, which involved personal defamation and malicious slander. This harassment reportedly continued for several years.
 |
| Image Credit: YouTube/Brenda Lui |
 |
| Image Credit: YouTube/Brenda Lui |
Recently, during a livestream, Wu Hang-Yee was asked why she attacked Mary Jean Reimer. Wu claimed that Reimer had once introduced her to a journalist and suggested that she sign an exclusive reporting agreement related to the Karmapa incident. The agreement reportedly prohibited Wu from publicly discussing the matter on her own. Wu said she refused to accept the offer and criticized the journalist’s attitude as harsh and unpleasant.
In response, Mary Jean Reimer clarified that the incident had nothing to do with her and questioned why Wu was blaming her for it. Reimer also remarked, “If you sue in the U.S., legal fees can be paid after you win,” implying that if Wu truly intended to take legal action, money should not be an obstacle.
It is speculated that Mary Jean Reimer may have unintentionally “blocked Wu’s financial path.” Given the high traffic of the Buddhism Alert page, Wu might have hoped to continue publishing posts and stirring controversy there for potential financial gain. However, once Reimer revoked her posting privileges, it effectively cut off that revenue stream. Wu appears to have borne a grudge since then, seeking revenge—an act of ingratitude that many find deeply disappointing.
Wu Hang-Yee and Amen Launch Paid Membership Channel
Wu Hang-Yee and Amen have launched a membership-based channel on Amen’s platform, focusing primarily on Wu’s personal feuds and entanglements with various public figures. The base membership fee is £439.99 per month (approximately USD 586). To access specialized content areas, members must pay additional monthly fees.
The subscription rates for each thematic section are as follows:
• “Karmapa Special Zone” – £399.99/month (approx. USD 453)
• “Mary Jean Reimer Special Zone” – £269.99/month (approx. USD 360)
• “Sir Hui & Wu Hang-Yee Romance Zone” – £439.99/month (approx. USD 586)
These zones primarily feature commentary and accusations targeting specific public figures, sparking widespread concern and debate over the nature of the channel’s operations and its underlying motives.
More Private Matters Revealed in Livestream: False Accusations Persist
On the night of March 17, 2025, two Hong Kong YouTubers hosted a livestream, during which Wu Hang-Yee and her boyfriend Amen joined the chat room via call-in.
In this livestream, Wu Hang Yee publicly discussed her private life in detail, revealing her intimate relationship with Mr. Hui. She described moving into his luxury residence, bathing together twice daily, and engaging in oral sex, while also expressing dissatisfaction that he failed to fulfill his promise to marry her on Christmas. Her candid demeanor and unreserved discussion of her liberal views on sexuality and related behavior drew significant public attention and controversy.
Notably, Wu Hang Yee had previously appeared in public with a shaved head and wearing monastic robes, identifying herself as a “nun.” However, as early as March 3, 2019, she admitted in a post on her Chinese-language Facebook page that she had only taken the Five Precepts as a lay Buddhist and had not undergone formal ordination, nor had she taken a vow of celibacy. Her current behavior stands in stark contrast to the religious image she once portrayed, further fueling public skepticism about her credibility and motivations.
During the same livestream, Amen accused the Karmapa and the website “The Truth About the Karmapa Incident” of defaming and bullying Wu, even threatening retaliation. Meanwhile, Wu continued to fabricate stories about her alleged past with the Karmapa.
In truth, the dispute between Wu and Mr. Hui was originally a private matter. However, Wu chose to publicize the issue by producing three crystal-themed videos and discussing them openly during livestreams—possibly out of revenge—thus triggering a wider controversy. By repeatedly spreading unverified accusations in public, she expanded a personal conflict into a wider scandal, dragging others into the turmoil and further escalating the chaos.
——————
Source:
— 許Sir 與鄔幸兒的一段情(廣東話）”A Relationship Between Mr. Hui (許Sir) and Wu Hang-Yee (Cantonese)”
— 許Sir 直播踢爆鄔幸兒. “Mr. Hui’s Livestream Exposes Wu Hang-Yee”
— 阿門怒斥許家民「毀鄔幸兒一生」,同時誓要滅掉「藏傳佛教」! “Amen Slams Hui Ka-Man for “Ruining Wu Hang-Yee’s Life” and Vows to Destroy “Tibetan Buddhism””
DeepSeek AI Commentary on the Wu Hang-Yee Controversy
1. Personal Conduct and Moral Controversies
Blurred Lines Between Emotion and Interest
Wu established intimate relationships with two older men in a short period, often accompanied by monetary requests or hints at marriage. Regardless of legal implications, this pattern of “trading intimacy for resources” crosses a societal moral line regarding the purity of emotional relationships.
The Vicious Cycle of Falsehoods
From fabricated pregnancies to invented connections with the Karmapa and false accusations against Mr. Hui and Mary Jean Reimer, Wu’s behavior shows how “victim narratives” can be weaponized to garner sympathy or attack others. This not only harms those directly involved but also erodes public trust in real victims.
2. Amplification by the Digital Ecosystem
The Lure of the Attention Economy
Wu and Amen monetized their private disputes through a paid subscription channel, selling scandalous content at high prices. This reflects the internet’s distorted trend of “scandal for profit,” where audience curiosity and the parties’ profit motives form a complicit relationship that escalates private conflicts into public spectacles.
Social Media’s Amplification Effect
From livestreams revealing intimate details to call-in programs spreading unverified accusations, digital platforms have become hotbeds for emotional outbursts and misinformation. Their use of public pressure—such as Amen’s threat to sue Mr. Hui—shows how “trial by social media” simplifies and inflames complex real-world issues.
3. The Double-Edged Nature of Vulnerability Labels
The 'Mental Impairment' Controversy and Protection Mechanisms
Amen’s claim that Wu is “mentally impaired,” and his questioning of Mr. Hui’s behavior, may have been intended as protection. However, labeling an adult woman as “incapable” can strip her of agency. If Wu does suffer from psychological or cognitive disorders, such matters should be handled by professionals, not used as weapons in online arguments.
Emotional Vulnerability of the Elderly
Both Mr. Hui and Amen are older single men. Wu’s rapid emotional intimacy may have taken advantage of their loneliness. This case highlights society’s neglect of seniors’ emotional needs and how they can be targets of emotional manipulation or fraud in the digital age.
4. The Boundary Between Law and Ethics
Defamation and Privacy Violations
Wu’s public comparisons of male genitalia and Amen’s accusations against the Karmapa may constitute defamation or privacy infringement. However, the cross-border nature of internet speech and the difficulty of gathering evidence make legal accountability costly and inefficient, allowing controversies to continue unimpeded.
A Cautionary Tale for Advocacy in Religious Circles
Mary Jean Reimer initially offered Wu a platform to speak, but faced backlash when Wu’s claims remained unverified. This highlights the responsibility of public advocates to balance the empowerment of marginalized voices with diligent fact-checking.
5. Social Reflections and Cautionary Lessons
Caution Toward Victim Narratives
This case reminds the public that while compassion for the vulnerable is important, reasoned judgment must prevail. Justice should be grounded in evidence, not one-sided allegations.
Whether it’s Mr. Hui’s “five-night affair” or Amen’s rapid engagement, this controversy reveals the high risks of online relationships. Blurred lines around privacy and finances can lead to serious consequences, especially in relationships with imbalances in power, age, or financial status.
Conclusion
The Wu Hang-Yee case is, at its core, a multi-player internet drama, blending truth and fabrication, emotion and calculation. It exposes both individual moral lapses and systemic issues within online society: a “traffic-first” culture that devalues truth, and a narrative war of “victim vs. perpetrator” where no one truly wins.
For the public, maintaining critical distance and refusing to consume private controversies as entertainment may be the only way to avoid complicity. Legal and psychological issues, meanwhile, should be handled by professionals, not reduced to entertainment fodder in livestreams.
— Analysis by DeepSeek AI
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Clarifying the Recent False Allegations by Wu Hang Yee Against the Karmapa
In early 2019, Taiwan’s Mirror Media reported allegations made by Jane Huang against the 17th Gyalwang Karmapa. Shortly afterward, Wu Hang Yee from Hong Kong and Vikki Han Huixin (Dazhen Shi), a Chinese woman living in Canada, also posted similar claims on their respective Facebook pages.
We have carefully reviewed and responded to the various accusations made between 2019 and 2022 by these individuals. In this statement, we present clear clarifications and rebuttals to each of their claims to uncover the truth.
A comprehensive video compiling the so-called “evidence” provided by them alongside our point-by-point responses is now available. Please click the link in the description below to watch:
【The truth about the false allegations against the 17th Karmapa】(Full Version 2019–2022)
Regarding the Allegation of “Online Sexual Activity”
Wu Hang Yee has consistently operated using a strategy of “lies to cover lies”: whenever her claims are exposed as false, she swiftly replaces them with new fabrications or deletes the original content to avoid scrutiny. Recently, she once again made false allegations against the Karmapa. We will continue to expose the fictional nature of her claims and present the truth.
In a livestream held on March 17, 2025, Amen—speaking on behalf of Wu Hang Yee—claimed that Wu had engaged in online sexual activity with Karmapa via Skype since 2011. However, when a viewer asked during the livestream whether there was any evidence of this, Wu Hang Yee immediately admitted: “There is no evidence.”
A review of Wu Hang Yee’s accusations reveals numerous contradictions and inconsistencies. Since January 22, 2019, Wu began posting so-called “evidence” on her Chinese-language Facebook page.
1. Contradictions in the Skype Account
• On March 2, 2019, in the Chinese version of her Facebook post, Wu Hang Yee claimed that in 2011, the Karmapa contacted her and engaged in cybersex using the Skype account “pamagaga139” (with the display name “ดาว”).
• On March 3, she posted the same content on the “Buddhist Alert” page.
In a 2020 YouTube video, Wu Hang Yee changed her story, claiming that Karmapa used a Skype account named “SOUL.BOY.99” In the video, she repeated the same story from 2011, with the only difference being the change in the Skype account name.
• In the 2020 YouTube version, she changed her claim again, stating that the Karmapa used the account “SOUL.BOY.99.”
• However, verification shows that the account “SOUL.BOY.99” was registered in the United States, which contradicts the fact that the Karmapa has been residing in India for years. Additionally, the account’s display name, “Ημέρα,” is Greek for “day” or “sun,” and has no connection whatsoever to the Karmapa.
On March 17, 2025, Wu Hang Yee publicly admitted that she had “no evidence.” However, back in 2020, she had actively claimed that Karmapa's Skype account was “SOUL.BOY.99.” This inconsistency highlights the lack of credibility in her accusations and exposes the clear contradictions in her narrative.
2. Lack of Key Evidence
• In a recent livestream, Wu Hang Yee personally admitted that she has no evidence of any online sexual activity.
• This directly proves that her accusations are baseless and entirely fabricated.
3. Obvious Signs of Fabrication
• The two Skype accounts she cited over the years are completely different, yet the story she tells remains exactly the same.
• The so-called “online sexual activity” is pure fiction—nothing more than a malicious, self-directed act of defamation.
Conclusion
As we previously pointed out, Wu Hang Yee has a pattern of covering exposed lies with new ones. In 2019, she claimed she contacted the Karmapa via a Skype account named “pamagaga139,” which upon investigation turned out to be an account she created herself, entirely unrelated to the Karmapa.
In 2020, she shifted her story again in a YouTube video, this time claiming the account was “SOUL.BOY.99.” That too was disproven: the account was registered in the U.S., used a Greek display name, and had no connection to the Karmapa, who resides in India.
Soon after, she deleted all her Facebook posts dated before April 17, 2019, clearly attempting to erase past claims and avoid public scrutiny. Finally, during a livestream in March 2025, when pressed by viewers for any evidence, she openly admitted: “There is no evidence.”
These contradictions effectively expose themselves—she is, in fact, admitting that she has been lying all along.
Wu Hang Yee’s accusations are fundamentally flawed and riddled with inconsistencies. She has publicly acknowledged that she cannot produce any critical evidence. The alleged “cybersex” scenario is entirely fictitious, and she has now inadvertently confessed that all related accounts and content were fabricated.
Ultimately, the story she constructed cannot withstand the test of truth.
All signs indicate that her claims are nothing but malicious fabrications intended to defame the Karmapa, mislead the public, and serve her own interests.
The lies of Wu Hang Yee and Jane Huang's Youtube video
| Date | Platform / Context | Wu Hang Yee’s Accusation | Verified Facts & Contradictions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 2, 2019 | Facebook post (Chinese) | Claimed Karmapa used Skype account “pamagaga139” (Thai: ดาว) in 2011 for online sexual acts | Screenshots & call logs provided; account was self-created and unrelated to the Karmapa |
| Mar 3, 2019 | “Buddhist Alert” repost | Repeated same claim about “pamagaga139” | Content identical to Facebook post; still no real evidence |
| 2020 | YouTube video (public) | Changed Skype account to “SOUL.BOY.99”, same 2011 story | IP traced to U.S., nickname in Greek (“Ημέρα”); no connection to Karmapa who was based in India |
| Mar 17, 2025 | Amen’s livestream | Amen claimed the sexual interaction; Wu admitted: “There’s no evidence” | She contradicted earlier claims of having “Skype logs,” effectively disproving herself |
| Issue Type | Details |
|---|---|
| Contradictory Account IDs | Used different Skype IDs for the same story — “pamagaga139” and “soul.boy.99” — showing signs of fabrication |
| Lack of Evidence | In 2025, openly admitted having no evidence, which contradicts earlier claims of possessing “Skype logs” |
| Obvious Fabrication | Fixed storyline with shifting account details, inconsistent languages and geographic indicators; suggests intent to deceive |
| Deleted Post History | Deleted all Facebook posts prior to April 17, 2019 — likely to hide past inconsistencies and avoid scrutiny |
Distinguishing the Authentic and Fake Karmapa Accounts
In Wu Hang Yee’s alleged relationship with the Karmapa, communication records via Line and Skype played a pivotal role. She wove a series of narratives around these two platforms, claiming that the conversations served as key evidence of her involvement with the Karmapa. Wu provided several accounts which she claimed belonged to the Karmapa, including three Skype accounts and one Line account. Among them, the Skype usernames “pamagaga139” (Thai name: ดาว) and “SOUL.BOY.99” (Greek name: Ημέρα) were all acknowledged by Wu Hang Yee herself to be fake accounts impersonating the Karmapa.
Next, we will further examine the third Skype account she provided, as well as the Line account she repeatedly cited as crucial evidence of her communications with the Karmapa, in order to determine the authenticity of these accounts.
The Karmapa’s Line Account
In early January 2019, Taiwan’s Mirror Media reported on Jane Huang’s allegations against the Karmapa. Shortly afterward, on January 22, 2019, the Karmapa’s Chinese translator, Venerable Miaorong, immediately contacted him via Line to ask how they should refer to this “Ms. H” in public statements.
The Karmapa replied:
“I think we shouldn’t issue an official response — that would only help them.
She has a mental illness and needs medication. All the women she mentioned have no connection to me; it’s all in her imagination. Better not to mention her name casually — if someone confronts her, it could get ugly. Just say her surname is ‘Huang’. That way, she feels reassured, and I’m fine. Times have changed; let’s learn from celebrities!” (Source: Jane Huang vs. Lodro Rinchen, Second Trial Judgment, Section IV(2), middle portion)
Venerable Miaorong was in contact with the Karmapa via Line, and his Line display name was in Chinese: 「第一宝藏」(First Treasure). This conversation later became part of the evidence submitted by Lodro Rinchen in the defamation lawsuit brought by Jane Huang. As a result, the “第一宝藏” Line account was officially recognized during the court proceedings.
Contradiction Between Account Names and Writing Style
Wu Hang Yee seems to have a particular fondness for the word “scum” (渣). In her memoir, the term “scumbag” (渣男) appears countless times. Coincidentally, the Line and Skype account names she claims belonged to the Karmapa also contain the word “渣scum.”
Wu Hang Yee claims to be a disciple of the Karmapa, yet she provided highly questionable messaging accounts. The Line and Skype conversations she attributed to the Karmapa came from users with account names in Thai and Bengali: “กาก” (meaning “scum” in Thai) and “চাদ” (a Bengali transliteration also implying “scum”). These scripts bear a slight visual resemblance to Tibetan, which could mislead those unfamiliar with the Tibetan language. However, they are entirely unrelated. This choice of naming appears to be a deliberate attempt to create confusion and falsely present these accounts as originating from the Tibetan Buddhist community.
What’s even more suspicious is that the accounts communicating with Wu Hang Yee used only Simplified Chinese. However, those familiar with the Karmapa know that since the early 2000s, whether in letters, calligraphy, articles, or social media posts, He has consistently used Traditional Chinese characters. The Karmapa once stated that His interest in the Chinese language began after He arrived in India, and from then on, He committed Himself to studying it. Since many of the early Chinese translators and disciples around Him were from Taiwan, He naturally learned and came to prefer Traditional Chinese.
He has a particular fondness for classical Chinese literature and Traditional Chinese script. To this day, all of His writings—including calligraphy, letters, and messages—are predominantly in Traditional characters. This has become His consistent style and is deeply etched in the memories of His disciples from Taiwan and Hong Kong.
If Wu Hang Yee were truly His disciple, how could she be completely unaware of such a defining trait?
Given the contradictions in account names and writing style, the credibility of Wu Hang Yee’s alleged chat records is highly questionable. In fact, these accounts were almost certainly fabricated by Wu herself. Her obsession with the word “scum” (as seen in names like “Residual Scum” and “Scum”) clearly reflects her own linguistic patterns. Realistically, who besides Wu Hang Yee would name both a Line and Skype account after the word “scum”?
Want to know how we exposed Wu Hang Yee’s fake accounts? Click the link in the description below for full details. Fake Karmapa Accounts
| Category | Official Karmapa Line Account | Wu Hang Yee’s Claimed Line Account |
|---|---|---|
| Account Name | 第一宝藏 (First Treasure) Chinese | Scum กาก(in Thai letters) |
| Written Language | Traditional Chinese | Simplified Chinese |
| Chat Timestamp | January 22, 2019 (after Mirror Media report) | Early 2018 to early 2019 |
| Conversation Partner | Venerable Miaorong (Karmapa’s official translator) | Wu Hang Yee |
| Public Verification | Submitted as court evidence, legally confirmed | No legal basis or source validation |
| Language Consistency with Karmapa | Yes: Karmapa consistently uses Traditional Chinese | No: Unusual account name and Simplified Chinese |
| Visual Design | Clear Chinese characters | Foreign script (Thai) mimicking Tibetan appearance |
AI Voice Cloning
Today, AI voice cloning technology is widely known and commonly used, but back in 2018, it remained an unfamiliar field to most people. At the time, the general public believed that AI voice mimicry was still in development, unaware that China’s Baidu had already successfully developed highly realistic voice synthesis technology as early as 2017. This technology was being widely misused among the public and even exploited by criminals for fraud.
It was this very technology that Wu Hang Yee, Jane Huang, and Vikki Han used to fabricate audio recordings of the Karmapa’s voice, claiming they had communicated with him via Line and Skype. These alleged voice recordings all dated back to 2018. However, the fake accounts involved were quickly exposed, making it clear that the voice recordings could not possibly be authentic. In truth, those voices were artificially generated using then-advanced AI voice cloning technology.
The Karmapa may well be the first international religious leader to have been framed using AI-generated voice.
Vikki Hui Xin Han and Wu Hang Yee conspired to defraud US$10 million
Conspired to defraud 10 million U.S. dollars
On March 17, 2025, during a public livestream, Wu Hang Yee claimed that she had personally asked the 17th Karmapa for ten million US dollars as compensation for what she described as “seven years of a deceived relationship.” She also asserted that she received only ten thousand dollars from him as living expenses.
However, as early as November 19, 2018, Wu had proactively contacted Lodro Nyima and clearly stated: “Another person and I each want ten million USD in compensation.” This reveals that her demand at the time was not an individual action, but rather a coordinated plan made in collaboration with another party—directly contradicting her later 2025 claim that the request had been made unilaterally.
At the time, we once believed that the “other person” referred to Jane Huang—until the end of 2020, when Vikki Han Huixin (Dazhen Shi), a Chinese woman residing in Canada, suddenly began posting on Facebook for several consecutive days. For reasons still unknown, she voluntarily exposed the long-term collusion between herself and Wu Hang Yee, in which both had separately attempted to defraud ten million U.S. dollars. She admitted to possessing a large number of Line chat records with Wu Hang Yee, which revealed that Wu frequently referred to her as the “Karmapa” and addressed her using the masculine term “Ah Ge” (meaning “brother”). The infamous scenario involving an “advance payment of $10,000” was, in fact, one of the scripted scams they had fabricated together.
In reality, as early as between the beginning of 2018 and early 2019, Wu Hang Yee and Vikki Han had begun forging fake chat records. They even deliberately used the Thai word “กาก” (meaning “residue”or “scum”) as the account name, in an attempt to mislead the public into believing it was a Tibetan name and that the account belonged to the Karmapa. In the chat logs, Han consistently used Simplified Chinese. Since she had immigrated to Canada from China at the age of 30, she was simply typing in the style she was accustomed to. Ironically, this linguistic inconsistency became a key piece of evidence—Wu Hang Yee, who claimed to be a “disciple of the Karmapa,” was entirely unaware that the Karmapa consistently uses Traditional Chinese. This crucial detail ultimately exposed the fictitious nature of her identity and the forged conversations.
Conclusion
From boasting about demanding $10 million in “emotional compensation” from the Karmapa, to fabricating claims of having received $10,000 in living expenses, and finally to her accomplice openly admitting that all conversations were forged — the elaborate story Wu Hang Yee constructed has completely collapsed in the face of the facts.
Wu Hang Yee’s Claims vs. The Truth:
• Claimed she demanded $10 million from the Karmapa as “emotional compensation”
• Claimed she received only $10,000 for living expenses
• The truth: all conversations were fabricated in collusion with Dazhen Shi — no money was ever received
Whether it was the $10 million or the $10,000 — it was all a lie she scripted and performed herself.
This drama, disguised as the story of a “seven-year emotional victim,” was ultimately nothing more than a carefully orchestrated fraud.
To learn more about the scheme between Wu Hang Yee and Dazhen Shi (a Canadian citizen of Chinese origin) to defraud $10 million, and the details of how Wu Hang Yee directly demanded $10 million in “emotional compensation” in her conversation with Karmapa’s disciple Lodrö Rinchen, please click the link below:
Vikki Hui Xin Han and Wu Hang Yee conspired to defraud US$10 million
The 30-Million-Dollar Red Coral Mala
Wu Hang Yee claimed that the Karmapa had given her his one and only coral-and-gold mala, which he had worn since childhood and during his escape from Tibet. She even planned to auction it, claiming it was worth as much as 30 million USD. However, the facts stand in stark contrast to her account.
In photographs from the Karmapa’s childhood, as well as in footage from 1998 during a circumambulation at Tsurphu Monastery in Tibet, a distinct bead of a different color can be observed on his mala. However, due to the limitations of camera angles and lighting at the time, the exact color of this unique bead could not be clearly identified.
It was not until 2022, during the livestream of the “Gampopa Commemoration Ceremony” led by the Karmapa, that this mala reappeared. In the broadcast, the distinctive bead was clearly visible as a bluish-green color, similar to turquoise. This indicates that the mala has remained with the Karmapa since his childhood and was not, as some have claimed, given away to someone else.
On March 18, 2025, during a livestreamed teaching on the Fifty Verses of Guru Devotion, the Karmapa once again used the same mala with the bluish-green bead, further confirming that it is still in his possession and has never left his side.
 |
The photo shows the Gyalwa Karmapa walking along the circumambulation path of Tsurphu Monastery in November 1998 (photographed by Woeser). |
 |
| Commemoration Ceremony of the Parinirvana of Master Gampopa – August 12, 2022 |
 |
| March 18, 2025 Livestream: Fifty Verses of Guru Devotion Teaching |
In her post, Wu Hang Yee claimed that the Karmapa’s “only coral and gold mala” was completely different from the “$30 million red coral mala” she possessed—effectively contradicting her earlier statement and undermining her own story. What’s surprising is that, despite claiming it to be a significant keepsake from the Karmapa, the so-called “evidence” she presented bears no resemblance whatsoever to the alleged original item. Such a blatant discrepancy suggests a careless attempt at fabrication. Moreover, she clearly lacks any knowledge of the actual features and details of the mala the Karmapa uses.
In reality, similar red coral malas are readily available on major online shopping platforms at low prices and are easily accessible. This alone exposes the absurdity of her “high-value artifact” claim. Her narrative is not only weak and implausible, but also riddled with contradictions.
 |
| Source: Wu Hang Yee Facebook /US$30 Million Dollars Mala |
ChatGPT AI’s Comparative Analysis and Truth Behind the Three Malas
A mala is not only a spiritual tool but also a reflection of a practitioner’s inner state. Recently, a claim surfaced about a red mala allegedly worth 30 million USD, sparking public interest. However, the contrast between fact and fiction is striking:
First Mala: The Mala Currently Used by the Karmapa
This is a humble brown mala, with one distinctly turquoise-colored bead. It frequently appears in the Karmapa’s live teachings and ritual broadcasts. Though modest and unassuming, it carries the energy of years of practice and blessing.
Second Mala: The Childhood Mala
Photos of the Karmapa in his youth show a mala strikingly similar to the current one—brown beads with a uniquely colored bead in the same position. This strongly suggests that it is the same mala, one that has accompanied him since childhood and witnessed his spiritual journey.
Third Mala: The Fabricated Red Mala
A bright red mala with a tassel has been marketed as “natural red coral” and claimed to be worth 30 million USD. In reality, identical-looking malas are commonly found on online shopping platforms for under 20 USD and are likely replicas. The claim of an “exorbitantly valuable sacred object” does not hold up—it is nothing more than an exaggerated deception.
The Concise Comparison Table
| Feature | Karmapa’s Current Mala | Karmapa’s Childhood Mala | All-Red Coral Mala |
|---|---|---|---|
| Color | Brown + turquoise bead | Brown + turquoise bead | Fully red |
| Turquoise Bead | Yes | Yes | No |
| Material | Wood or bone | Wood or bone | Resin or imitation coral |
| Design Style | Simple and modest | Similarly simple | Ornate with tassel |
| Usage | Daily recitation and practice | Childhood practice | Claimed “evidence” in fictional story |
| Actual Price | Not for sale (spiritual value) | Same | Under USD 20 |
| Claimed Price | None | None | Falsely claimed as USD 30 million |
| Authenticity | Authentic spiritual object | Authentic spiritual object | Fabricated and misleading |
Conclusion
Wu Hang Yee claimed that the Karmapa gave her the prayer beads he had worn since childhood, presenting them as a “$30 million natural red coral mala.” However, the facts are clear: the Karmapa is still using the same brown mala with a distinct turquoise bead—an item that has accompanied him since childhood and can be seen repeatedly in his live teachings and public appearances over the years. It has never left his possession.
In contrast, the red tassel mala showcased by Wu Hang Yee bears no resemblance to the Karmapa’s mala in material, color, or design. It is indistinguishable from inexpensive replicas commonly found on the market. The so-called “precious sacred object” is nothing more than another fabricated story, exploiting mystery for personal gain.
Between truth and falsehood, the evidence speaks for itself. The authenticity of spiritual practice cannot be veiled by lies.
Wu Hang Yee’s ‘$30M Mala’ & Lake House Claim: The Truth Unveiled
Wu Hang Yee’s Three Alleged Sexual Encounter
1.The Lake House Incident
Wu Hang Yee alleged that she had sexual relations with the Karmapa at the “Lake House” and that a conflict arose over a struggle for a mala. According to her, the mala in question was the Karmapa’s “one and only coral and gold mala,” supposedly worn since childhood and valued at USD 30 million. However, the mala she presented was made of red coral and looked entirely different from what she described. In reality, the Karmapa has worn a set of brown mala beads inlaid with small turquoise-green beads since childhood and still keeps them in his possession—they were never lost. This renders her story of a struggle over the mala entirely implausible.
More importantly, several alleged “witnesses” mentioned in Wu Hang Yee’s posts—including the owner of the Lake House—have clearly stated that no argument or struggle over a mala occurred on that day. Both eyewitness testimony and physical evidence prove that this entire account was fabricated.
Wu Hang Yee’s claim of a mala struggle has been thoroughly investigated and confirmed to be baseless and fictitious. On that basis, her assertion that she had her first sexual encounter with the Karmapa at the Lake House becomes highly questionable.
According to the Lake House owner—a lawyer—Wu Hang Yee had gone there solely to accompany her seriously ill friend, Wanda. That first day, she had the opportunity to meet the Karmapa only because of this, and the lawyer personally drove them back to the hotel afterward. As for the following morning—the time Wu claims the sexual encounter took place—the lawyer confirmed that the Karmapa did not meet with Wu Hang Yee or her friend, and that there were several other witnesses present who could corroborate this. All testimonies were consistent and mutually verified, thoroughly disproving Wu’s version of events as a complete fabrication.
Both the claims of sexual activity and the alleged mala struggle are fictional. The Lake House owner has also issued a stern warning, stating that if Wu Hang Yee continues to spread such falsehoods, he will consider taking legal action to protect both his own reputation and that of the Karmapa.
What is even more regrettable is that Wu claimed she was accompanying the terminally ill Wanda to meet the Karmapa, yet later twisted this into a fictional episode in her memoir, dragging Wanda—who has since passed away—into her narrative. As the deceased cannot defend themselves, she effectively turned Wanda into an unwilling “accomplice” in her fabricated story. Wu has previously used the same tactic with her late sister, attempting to frame the Karmapa. This pattern of exploiting the deceased to concoct false allegations is not only profoundly inappropriate, but also raises serious moral concerns and is difficult to accept.
In her memoir, The True Face of the Scumbag: Chapter One, Wu Hang Yee claims that after the first alleged sexual encounter with the Karmapa, they continued to communicate via Skype. She specifically emphasized: “The Skype chat clearly shows that this is the Karmapa’s account.” However, the account name was in Bengali: “চাদ,” which literally means “scum.”
Such a “coincidence” is anything but. Wu Hang Yee’s fixation on the word “scum” is evident—from the memoir’s title to the alleged account name. It is clear that the account was fabricated to lend credibility to her invented narrative. Her claim of a “first sexual encounter” therefore collapses under its own weight—it is entirely fictional.
 |
| Source: Wu Hang Yee Blog |
2. The New York Dharma Event
In a livestream on March 17, 2025, “Amen” claimed that it was the Karmapa who “called” Wu Hang Yee to the United States. Wu herself also wrote in her memoir that the Karmapa sent her a message via Skype on May 17, 2018, “calling” her to the U.S. However, these claims are completely inconsistent with the facts.
In reality, Wu Hang Yee independently registered in Hong Kong to attend a public Dharma event hosted by the Karmapa in New York, and traveled to the U.S. with a Hong Kong-based Buddhist group. The event she attended was the “Compassion, Love, Action: Teachings on the Thirty-Seven Practices of a Bodhisattva,” held from May 29 to 31, 2018. It was co-organized by the Karmapa’s Hong Kong Khyenno Foundation and the U.S.-based Karma Triyana Dharmachakra (KTD).
During this period, Wu stayed at the Aloft Harlem Hotel, which was arranged for all group participants. She shared a room with fellow practitioners, and the hotel was only about a 15-minute walk from the teaching venue, the River Church.
On May 31, 2018, Wu Hang Yee attended the Vajrasattva empowerment bestowed by the Karmapa. In the YouTube video, from the beginning up to 17 minutes and 30 seconds, Wu Hang Yee can be seen seated among many Dharma friends in the teaching hall.
Subsequently, from June 6 to 10, 2018, the Karmapa personally presided over the 9th North American Kagyu Monlam. Wu Hang Yee also attended the event with a group from Hong Kong. The prayer gathering took place from 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. each day, with the Karmapa present throughout the entire duration.
What is surprising, however, is that Wu Hang Yee claimed in her memoir that from May 25 to June 11, she had “absolutely no contact” with the Karmapa for “a full two weeks.” This claim was quickly contradicted by the very Thai LINE chat record titled “กาก” (literally “residue/scum”) that she herself made public: a message exchange with the so-called “Karmapa account” appears on June 1. More importantly, during this alleged period of “no contact,” she personally attended the Karmapa’s public teachings and empowerment sessions every day. To suggest she had no contact with the Karmapa for two weeks is simply illogical.
 |
| Source: Wu Hang Yee Blog |
 |
| Source: Wu Hang Yee Facebook |
In her memoir, Wu Hang Yee deliberately conceals the fact that her trip was arranged through a group registration and carried out as part of a collective itinerary. She also omits details about her accommodation and the religious events she attended. This omission appears calculated to fabricate a false narrative: that she was personally “summoned” by the Karmapa to a private meeting in the U.S., during which an intimate relationship supposedly occurred—further insinuating that the Karmapa was simultaneously involved with other women. These claims are built entirely on a distortion and suppression of publicly verifiable facts and are starkly inconsistent with the group-based nature of her actual visit.
Ample evidence suggests that Wu Hang Yee deliberately invented this storyline in an attempt to defame the Karmapa. Yet her own communication records and detailed travel itinerary betray the truth. No matter how intricately lies are woven, they cannot eclipse the light of truth.
It is also worth noting that several Chinese individuals who were embedded at the KTD Center in New York during the two Dharma events in question—individuals who participated in those gatherings—would later become the main conspirators behind the fabricated accusations in the “Karmapa incident.” As early as 2018, they had already begun laying the groundwork, manufacturing false evidence and carefully orchestrating a defamatory scheme.
Wu Hang Yee’s trip to the U.S. mirrored their agenda: she did not come for the Dharma, but rather to entrap and discredit the Karmapa.
3. The Five-Star Hotels in New York
In her memoir, Wu Hang Yee claims that she communicated with the Karmapa via Line and met him twice at The Mark Hotel and Baccarat Hotel in New York, during which they allegedly engaged in sexual relations.
However, the Karmapa’s actual Line account is named “第一宝藏” (“First Treasure”), while the screenshots she provides show a so-called “Karmapa account” using the Thai word “กาก” (meaning “scum”) as its display name—an extremely bizarre and inappropriate choice. If the account she was communicating with wasn’t even the Karmapa’s, how could any conversation or meeting with him have taken place?
More crucially, Vikki Han Huixin has publicly admitted in a Facebook post that she impersonated the Karmapa and was the one communicating with Wu Hang Yee through that fake account. In other words, Wu Hang Yee never had any contact with the real Karmapa, let alone met or became intimate with him. This entire story is a self-directed fabrication based on interactions with a false identity and an invented narrative.
The claims are not only gravely inaccurate but also cast serious doubts on her credibility. Such actions have deeply harmed the reputation and integrity of a monastic figure, raising troubling questions about the true motivations behind this elaborate deception.
 |
| Source:Wu Hang Yee Blog |
 |
| Source: Wu Hang Yee Blog |
Summary
The three incidents in which Wu Hing-yee alleges she had sexual encounters with the Karmapa—commonly referred to as the “Lake House incident,” the alleged meeting during a Dharma event in New York, and a visit to a five-star hotel—are entirely unsupported by factual evidence. Her claims are contradicted by travel records, eyewitness accounts, communication logs, and other objective sources. The so-called “evidence” she presents, including audio recordings and social media accounts, has been shown to originate from fabricated or impersonated sources.
From testimonies to digital records, and from communication timelines to event logistics, every aspect of her narrative reveals serious inconsistencies and falsehoods. These allegations not only misrepresent the facts but also cause serious harm to the reputation of a widely respected Buddhist leader. Given the weight of evidence, these claims should be recognized as deliberate fabrications with no credibility, and should be firmly rejected.
Photo Authenticity Analysis
In a livestream, Wu Hang Yee’s boyfriend, Ah Man, reiterated their accusations, claiming that the Karmapa had once demanded Wu to kneel before him at a five-star hotel. To support this claim, Wu presented a photo showing her kneeling beside the Karmapa as supposed “evidence.” At first glance, it appears to be an ordinary photo. However, technical analysis reveals several anomalies that are inconsistent with the conditions of a genuine photograph.
Photo Authenticity Analysis
(With technical support from ChatGPT AI)
(1) Unnatural Body Proportions and Posture
❌ The head appears disproportionately large compared to the body, suggesting possible resizing or editing.
❌ The standing figure looks stiff, with unnatural leg posture and lighting on clothing inconsistent with a natural stance.
(2) Hand Details Inconsistent with Natural Photography
Image “entropy” reflects detail and texture levels. Normally, different body parts should have similar entropy values.
📊 Entropy Analysis:
✔ Body: Higher entropy (6.65), indicating natural texture and detail.
❌ Hands: Lower entropy (5.94), suggesting blurring, splicing, or editing.
The disparity implies the hands may have been altered or sourced from a different image.
⚠ Finger placement appears stiff and the gesture of touching the nun’s hand looks unnatural.
(3) Lighting and Edge Issues
❌ Inconsistent light direction—body, hands, and background lighting do not align.
❌ Edges around the figure are overly smooth, lacking the natural transitions seen in real photos, suggesting possible copy-paste or retouching.
(4) Technical Context: Advanced Editing Available in 2018
While AI-generated images were not common in 2018, tools like Photoshop and image compositing were already capable of producing highly realistic fakes.
⚠ Regardless of the method used, the photo shows multiple technical flaws inconsistent with authentic photography.
Conclusion: Authenticity Highly Suspect
This photo was likely heavily edited or artificially composed. It does not appear to be a genuine documentary image.
Technical Note
This preliminary analysis was conducted with assistance from ChatGPT AI, based on principles of image processing and data comparison, to provide an objective reference.
(With technical support from ChatGPT AI)
Debunking the Rumor: “Did the Karmapa Not Take a Vow of Celibacy? Is He Allowed to Have a Girlfriend?”
A recent rumor circulating online falsely claims that His Holiness the 17th Karmapa is allowed to have a girlfriend because he supposedly “never took a vow of celibacy.” This is a serious misunderstanding and a misrepresentation of Buddhist monastic discipline. It reflects not only a confusion about the basics of Buddhist ethics, but also shows disrespect toward the spiritual path of ordained monks.
1.“Vow of Celibacy” Is Not a Formal Buddhist Term
The term “vow of celibacy” is not an official phrase in Buddhist vinaya (discipline). It is a modern, simplified way of referring to what is properly called the “precept of abstaining from sexual activity” or “maintaining brahmacharya” (pure conduct).
In traditional Buddhist scriptures and codes of conduct, there is no such term as “celibacy vow” — it is a colloquial term that oversimplifies and distorts the true nature of the precepts. The correct term is abstaining from sexual activity, which requires complete renunciation of sexual conduct for ordained monastics.
2. The Essence of Monastic Life Is Renunciation
Ordination in Buddhism is not merely about wearing robes or living outside of society. It stems from renunciation — the deep aspiration to be free from the endless cycle of birth and death (samsara).
Monks and nuns observe precepts to distance themselves from worldly desires and distractions so they can focus on practice and attain liberation. Therefore, complete celibacy is a fundamental principle of monastic discipline.
3. Precepts Are Layered, but Celibacy Begins at the Novice Level
Buddhist monastic discipline is structured in stages, each with increasing levels of commitment:
Śrāmaṇera (Novice Monk) Precepts:
Even at the novice stage, a monk must observe the Ten Precepts, one of which is abstaining from sexual activity (complete celibacy). Other precepts include refraining from killing, stealing, lying, consuming alcohol, engaging in entertainment, and handling money.
Bhikṣu (Fully Ordained Monk) Precepts:
A fully ordained monk takes on an extensive set of precepts — 227 in the Theravāda tradition, and over 250 in the Mahāyāna tradition. The very first of the Four Root Precepts is abstaining from sexual activity — violating this results in immediate loss of ordination status.
4. The Karmapa Has Received the Śrāmaṇera (Novice Monk) Vows
After the Karmapa escaped from Tibet and arrived in India in 2000, political circumstances led the Indian government to place strict limitations on his movements. For many years, he was prohibited from meeting his own lineage teachers—such as Situ Rinpoche—in public, which made it impossible for him to receive full bhikṣu (monastic) ordination in the traditional manner within the Karma Kagyu lineage.
Given this situation, the Karmapa respectfully requested the upāsaka (lay renunciate) vows from His Holiness the Dalai Lama, who belongs to the Gelug tradition. His original intention was to receive both the novice (śrāmaṇera) and full monastic (bhikṣu) ordinations from his Karma Kagyu lineage masters—Situ Rinpoche and Gyaltsab Rinpoche—when circumstances allowed.
However, His Holiness the Dalai Lama not only conferred the upāsaka vows but also went on to bestow the śrāmaṇera (novice monk) vows. This means that, although he has not yet had the opportunity to receive full ordination within his own lineage, the Karmapa is already a fully ordained novice monk under the guidance of one of Tibetan Buddhism’s highest authorities and has been observing the essential monastic precepts ever since.
The 17th Karmapa Received Novice Monk Vows from His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama
5. The Karmapa’s 2019 Teaching at the Kagyu Monlam
During the 36th Kagyu Monlam in 2019, the 17th Karmapa addressed thousands of monks and nuns, emphasizing that the essence of monastic life lies in genuine renunciation—the sincere aspiration to be free from samsara. While keeping monastic vows brings immense merit, he stressed that what truly defines a monk is the presence of renunciation. Because of this, he holds himself to a very high standard in practice.
The Karmapa candidly shared that he took both Upāsaka (lay renunciant) and Śrāmaṇera (novice monk) vows before His Holiness the Dalai Lama in 2002. However, at the time, he felt he had not yet fully developed strong renunciation, and thus considered that ordination spiritually incomplete. He expressed his intention to formally take full Bhikṣu ordination in the future, from his lineage masters in the Karma Kagyu tradition, when the conditions are right.
Full Transcript of the Address from His Holiness the 17th Gyalwang Karmapa to the 36th Kagyu Monlam
※ Additional Note: The full teaching lasted 30 minutes, but Taiwan’s Mirror Weekly released only a 2.5-minute clip, taken out of context. This selective editing led to widespread misunderstandings—such as “the Karmapa has not taken full ordination, so he is not bound by celibacy”—which seriously distort the truth.
6. Indian Government Has Lifted All Restrictions on the Karmapa
In May 2021, the case involving Vikki Han Huixin drew widespread attention, prompting the Indian government to take the matter seriously. By August of the same year, Prime Minister Narendra Modi publicly welcomed the Karmapa’s return to India and appointed officials to liaise with him, actively facilitating the process. All previous restrictions on the Karmapa were officially lifted.
This development means the Karmapa now has the opportunity to return to his lineage masters and formally receive full Bhikṣu ordination.
(Note: As early as late 2018, anticipating potential turmoil surrounding the Karmapa incident, the Karmapa voluntarily entered retreat and has remained in seclusion since. During this period, he has only appeared online to give Dharma teachings and has not made any public appearances. He awaits the day when the full truth is revealed, his name is cleared, and he can return to India to continue his Dharma activity and benefit sentient beings.)
The False Karmapa Allegations: India Government’s Positive Response and Future Outlook
7. May We Discern Truth from Falsehood and Uphold the Integrity of the Sangha
We kindly urge everyone to stop spreading misinformation. Such rumors not only harm a sincere practitioner who upholds pure vows, but also create serious negative karma through harmful speech.
May all readers cherish the Dharma, protect right view, and show respect to every true monastic who lives by their vows and walks the path of genuine practice.
“This Is Not Bullying—It’s Exposure”: A Response to Amen’s Accusations Against ‘‘Truth Page on the Karmapa Incident’
In a livestream on March 17, 2025, Amen accused the Facebook page “Truth Page on the Karmapa Incident” of slandering and bullying Wu Hang Yee and even threatened to take revenge on her behalf.
In reality, we—like many other concerned netizens—have only examined and fact-checked the content Wu Hang Yee herself publicly shared on her Facebook blog and YouTube channel since January 22, 2019. Her so-called “evidence” does not hold up to scrutiny—the entire narrative hinges on fake LINE and Skype accounts allegedly belonging to the Karmapa, from which a series of false claims and misleading conclusions were drawn.
Our analysis was based solely on her own published materials, and we transparently shared our findings with the public. After her 2019 posts were debunked, she switched to video format in 2020, yet her story still failed to withstand factual examination. What further casts doubt on her credibility is her deletion of all Chinese Facebook posts prior to April 17, 2019—a move that raises serious questions about her motives and integrity.
Instead of offering solid counterarguments, Wu Hang Yee responded by producing videos accusing the Karmapa’s followers of defamation and bullying. If she truly possessed convincing evidence, she should have used her platform to clearly refute the findings. Instead, she resorted to vague accusations to divert attention. Notably, the “evidence” she once claimed to have was later deleted, replaced by shifting explanations—until she finally admitted she had “no evidence” at all. This sequence of behavior strongly suggests fabrication and deliberate deception aimed at misleading the public and defaming the Karmapa.
We emphasize: the responsibility lies not with those who expose falsehoods, but with those who publish them. Every piece of information we analyzed was made public by Wu Hang Yee herself. We simply examined her claims using reason and presented our conclusions truthfully. While it’s understandable that being exposed might cause discomfort or embarrassment, this should not be mischaracterized as “bullying.”
In fact, the images spread by Amen—intended to ridicule and sexually humiliate—constitute true examples of online harassment and reveal the aggressor’s malicious intent. The real affront to Wu Hang Yee’s dignity comes not from fact-based investigations into her public claims, but from these degrading, suggestive memes. If Amen wishes to talk about bullying, he should start by examining the content he himself has circulated.
 |
| Source: YouTube/阿門 |
Conclusion
As the old saying goes, “A single misstep can lead to a lifetime of regret.” If one resorts to deception and false accusations for personal gain, it is ultimately their own credibility and future that are destroyed. The truth does not disappear in silence, and karma never fails to unfold.
Now, even before the full truth of the Karmapa incident has come to light, the consequences of harmful actions have already begun to surface. In time, justice will prevail, and the line between right and wrong will be made unmistakably clear.
