Disasters are occurring with more frequency and intensity, especially in regions considered vulnerable to climate change. For rural households, resilience to these short- and long-term disturbances can be shaped by intersecting vulnerabilities and mitigated by adaptive capacities. To understand short- and long-term rural disaster recoveries in the context of an uncertain changing planet, this paper focuses on tangible (e.g., hazard exposure, livelihood) and intangible (e.g., mental well-being) household recovery dynamics since the 2015 Nepal earthquakes. The mixed-method quantitative and qualitative study with community outreach randomly enrolled 400 households in four settlements with catastrophic impacts from the 2015 earthquakes and aftershocks. Our team conducted households surveys and in-depth interviews at 9 months, 1.5 years, 6.5 years, and 7.5 years after the events and returned at 2.5 years and 9.5 years to share results and solicit feedback. During this period, the sample experienced additional disturbances, such as an COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown and various economic hardships. We found that short- and long-term household recoveries primarily differed depending on social and spatial inequalities, hazard exposure, place- or cash-based livelihood opportunities, and accessibility. Increases in representative local governance, connectivity to select outside institutions and ideas, and local knowledge also influenced recovery outcomes. There were different pathways to recovery, place- and cash-based, that lead to similar outcomes. Social cohesion generated through mutual aid practices also assisted in short- and long-term recovery depending on the circumstances. Hindrances in actualizing recovery pathways were poorly formed social and/or economic networks and opportunities. Changes were occurring primarily in livelihood portfolios, with decreasing primary agropastoral livelihoods and increasing secondary cash-based livelihoods. Changes appeared to be underpinned by climatic, seismic, and economic uncertainty. More relevant and sustainable disaster and development planning could benefit from recognizing these integrated social and environmental dynamics, building resilience, enabling adaptations, and facilitating equitable change in rural lifeways.