A Buddhist approach to disaster recovery and resilience in Sri Lanka

A Buddhist approach to disaster recovery and
resilience in Sri Lanka
Ted Yu Shen Chen, PhD Candidate
Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning
University of Melbourne
t.chen2@pgrad.unimelb.edu.au
Abstract
This paper explores the idea of a Buddhist approach to disaster recovery through case studies of
two Buddhist non-government organisations that worked in the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami
recovery in Sri Lanka. Buddhism claims influence over millions of people’s worldviews,
including most of the population in Sri Lanka. This religion has within its own philosophical
framework an approach to disaster definition, recovery and resilience and can potentially make
a significant contribution to disaster research by offering a perspective that is currently very
much overlooked.
The paper begins with a deep understanding of the Buddhist philosophy to illicit three key
concepts that are particularly resonant to the perception and experience of disasters: human
suffering, dependant arising and compassion. Extending from these concepts a Buddhist
perspective is presented that describes disasters as a sudden and heightened level of human
suffering with its processes of recovery and resilience resting heavily on the holistic attention to
the physical, emotional and spiritual dimensions of the survivors.
Through the case studies of the Sarvodaya Shramadana Movement and the Buddhist
Compassion Relief Tzu Chi Foundation, the aim of the research is to tender a new area of study
within the disaster literature specifically focused on religious approaches to recovery and
resilience. These two case studies are not only the largest non-government organisation
indigenous to their respective countries, Sri Lanka and Taiwan, but also have strong Buddhist
practices that inform their approach.
The pursuit of this study builds upon the existing research in the area of religion and disaster
studies. This includes an established Christian literature on disaster management, as well as
empirical studies in disaster sociology focused on religious communities. The research also
intends to build on the Buddhist disaster literature by extending a strong foundation of
theological principles and a growing ‘socially engaged Buddhist’ literature. It is the hope that
insights from this exploratory research will encourage future studies in the area in order to be
able to draw broader conclusions about religious dimensions of recovery and resilience that are
also applicable to secular and government practices.
Keywords: Religious NGOs, post-disaster, recovery, resilience, Buddhism

1. Introduction
This paper stems from my current research into ‘a Buddhist approach to disaster recovery and
resilience’ post 2004 tsunami in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka as a Buddhist majority country has
embedded in its social infrastructure a religion that has been continually practiced for the last
2,500 years. Buddhism is not only a significant part of the Sri Lankan culture it is also a strong
influence on many people’s outlooks on life and the reality of disasters. This poses the
fundamental question of what a Buddhist approach to disaster is, and how that informs attitudes
towards recovery and resilience.
Focusing on two Buddhist non-government organisations (NGOs), Sarvodaya Shramadana
Movement (Sri Lanka) and Buddhist Compassion Relief Tzu Chi Foundation (Taiwan), the aim
of the paper is to extend from the Dhamma (Buddhist teachings) what a Buddhist approach to
disaster recovery and resilience looks like and how it is manifest in the relief and recovery
practices of these two NGOs to engender community resilience. These two case studies are
chosen because they are the largest NGOs in their respective countries and have strong
Buddhist principles guiding their practices. Sarvodaya with its extensive social network around
the country mobilised its members for Shramadana (volunteer help base on the Buddhist
principle of giving) and also built an eco-village for 55 families from three tsunami-affected
villages in Kalutara. Tzu Chi arrived in Sri Lanka three days after the tsunami and stayed with
the survivors for six years. On top of offering medical, food and shelter relief, Tzu Chi built the
Great Love Village in Hambantota for 649 families. Tzu Chi’s commitment also included the
construction of a secondary school, medical clinic, vocational training centre and the setting up
the village collaborative and community programs needed for a successful transition of assets to
the government and the residents.
Unfortunately, the limits of this paper prohibit discussion of the Buddhist approach from the
angle of the survivors but over the next four sections of this paper, the idea of the Buddhist
approach is developed from the NGO perspective. Section one explores the Buddhist approach
from the current context of academic research in Buddhism and disasters, sections two and
three build on ideas surrounding Buddhist disaster definition and resilience through the
discussion of three key Buddhist concepts: human suffering, dependant arising and compassion,
and the final section examines how the philosophy is practiced in the context of Sarvodaya and
Tzu Chi’s post tsunami efforts in Sri Lanka.
2. Buddhism and disaster research
In De Silva’s (2006) study, “The tsunami and its aftermath in Sri Lanka: Explorations of a
Buddhist perspective”, key aspects of the Buddhist religion and culture are explored in their
effectiveness to the coping and management of post-traumatic stress disorders. According to De
Silva, the practice of Buddhist philosophy such as ‘impermanence’ (anicca) enhances one’s
ability to accept the temporal nature of worldly existence and can assist with the coping of loss;

the concept of ‘Kamma’ (karma) which explains disasters as nature’s system of causation and
consequence and not acts of God can help people overcome a sense of guilt if they had
previously believed that disasters were God’s punishments; and the practice of ‘compassion’
(karuna) can encourage both people affected and unaffected by the disaster to assist with the
alleviation of suffering. Although De Silva presents a preliminary framework without an
empirical backdrop, the research nevertheless suggests that a Buddhist approach to disaster
recovery would extend from its larger philosophical worldview and the idiosyncratic practices
of each Buddhist and Buddhist NGO.
The limited literature in Buddhism and disasters does not seem to suggest a lack of interest in
religion and disasters. In the Christian tradition, there is already an established body of theology
driven literature that is particularly interested in what constitutes a Christian approach to
disaster and recovery. The handbook on the ‘Christian perspectives on disaster management’
(Davis and Wall 1992) is an important piece of work that maps what a ‘Christian’ approach
entails. The handbook draws concepts from the Bible on disaster mitigation (food storage in
Egypt, Genesis 41.34-36), preparedness (Noah’s ark, Genesis 6.13-22), disaster events (eg.
Earthquakes, Zechariah 14.5, Revelation 16:18 Luke 2.10-11), relief (food aid to Judea, Acts
11:27-30), rehabilitation (restoring mortgaged land, Ruth 4.1-12) and reconstruction (rebuilding
of Jerusalem, Nehemiah 6:15).
Theoretical work on what is considered a Buddhist approach to disaster is not available,
however, there is gathering interest around Buddhist perspectives on social action and
responsibility drawn directly from Buddha’s teachings of human suffering, dependant arising
and compassion (Bond 2003; Jones 1989; Sarvodaya Shramadana Movement 2009) that in the
context of disaster recovery and resilience can inform Buddhist approaches to social
engagement and action.
3. Buddhism and disaster definition
There is currently no academic consensus on what a disaster is (Dombrowsky 2006; Quarantelli
1998; Rosenthal 2006). Different definitions can be found across academic traditions and
research usually stems from each discipline’s own interests such as geography (Mileti 1999),
sociology (Quarantelli 1988) and anthropology (Oliver-Smith 2002). However, from the
experience of the survivors, disasters are not separated between different disciplines of
academic knowledge. To many survivors, their experiences are subjective, personal, real and
emotional; their recovery is usually very complex, demanding a range of needs from physical
housing to psychological counselling.
A Buddhist definition will be closely connected to how people perceive disasters and its
impact. The idea of defining disasters relative to the person experiencing is similar to Carr’s
interpretation of disasters as the collapse of ‘cultural protections’,

“Not every windstorm, earth-tremor, or rush of water is a catastrophe. A catastrophe is
known by its works; that is, to say, by the occurrence of disaster. So long as the shop
rides out the storm, so long as the city resists the earth-shocks, so long as the levees
hold, there is no disaster. It is the collapse of the cultural protections that constitutes the
disaster proper.” (Carr 1932:211)
How an individual perceives disasters and comes to terms with the physical and emotional
impacts can be influenced by the worldview that person has. This is most evident in academic
research where the worldview of researchers can be heavily influenced by their academic
disciplines. Such as researchers in the geography tradition approach disasters as nature-caused
events, where researchers in sociology would approach disasters as disruption to people and
communities. In the same light, Buddhists have their worldviews based on the philosophy
taught by Shakyamuni Buddha more than 2,500 years ago.
Buddhist philosophy teaches people to see themselves, others and their environments as
impermanent. Reality, from the Buddhist perspective, is manifest through its interconnected
and dependant arising conditions and is ultimately empty of self nature (Gyatso 2005).
This worldview, otherwise known as the right view in the Buddhist Noble Eightfold Path, aims
to encourage people to have awareness of not only their temporal existence but move further to
discover how any worldly existence is in fact in constant flux, changing to rising conditions,
making them empty of self nature. People, environments and even emotions fluctuate based on
its complex and dependent conditions. This is a difficult concept to understand because people
tend not to think of themselves and their minds as dependent on anything, however, this view is
easier when considering the growth and maturity of plants, dependant on the changing
conditions of sunlight, water and nutrients.
The wrong view will be to see the plant as self-determining (i.e. having a self nature), which is
a common human mistake such as believing we have control over our lives or how our day will
unfold. These types of wrong views induce attachment to the delusion of permanence, control
and security; therefore when things that are ultimately impermanent manifest its true nature,
people can get upset, depressed or even suicidal. All Buddhist teachings (Dhamma) are targeted
at the problem of people’s suffering from attachment to these delusions, in particular to
disasters because people cannot help clinging to things they lost, including their possessions,
family and even their own physical body.
This attachment-induced human suffering is central to the Buddhist perspective on what defines
a disaster. This is best illustrated by the Buddhist Four Noble Truths that elicit the universal
condition of suffering (Gyatso 2005):
• Life means suffering
• The origin of suffering is attachment
• The cessation of suffering is attainable, through
• The practice of the path to enlightenment (Dhamma)

In the Buddhist worldview, suffering is ubiquitous and relative. Whether it is the heat of the day
or an earthquake that has caused unprecedented deaths and property damage; suffering can be
induced by almost anything and is relative to the person subject to the experience. This is
evident by the fact that even the most pleasurable things to one person can be absolutely painful
to another such as sugar to a diabetic patient or a roller coaster ride to a pregnant mother.
Therefore, the Buddhist definition of disaster will not be focused on the disaster event but on
the degree of suffering caused by the event. This definition of disaster is ultimately subjective
and relates to tolerable thresholds of different people, cultures and attitudes.
In this new definition, the immediate temptation will be to measure thresholds of suffering.
However, keeping in mind that thresholds themselves are also temporary, therefore, this paper
extends a disaster definition from the Dhamma as: a sudden and heightened level of emotional
and physical suffering. The conceptualisation of disaster as a function of human suffering
allows the attention on disasters to be shifted back onto people and their immediate needs of a
life-supporting environment. In the same light, disaster recovery can be seen as the tapering off
of the intensity of suffering to levels of acceptable normalcy. Depending on the processes of
recovery, approaches with emphasis on reconstruction can cause physical suffering to taper off
more quickly than emotional suffering and vice versa (Figure 1).
Figure 1: Buddhist approach to physical and emotional recovery (source: author)

A Buddhist approach would be able to appreciate more the inter-connected relationships
between the physical and emotional dimensions of human suffering. Such as not having a
shelter to live in after disasters can also have psychological impacts from the lack of privacy
and security; equally, not having emotional care and psychological counselling can manifest in
depression or anxiety that lead to ailments in the physical body. The complex interdependencies
between the physical, emotional and the spiritual dimensions of human beings are
central to a Buddhist approach to disaster recovery. Extending this idea, the definition of
disaster resilience is a heightened ability to reduce or accept suffering.
Resilience based on religious cultures is not limited to Buddhism and can be found across all
forms of religions. Although resilience research based on religious beliefs and spirituality is
new to traditional disaster literature it can be found in research within rehabilitation healthcare.
Spirituality as the practice of religious beliefs have been demonstrated to have a positive
connection to post traumatic growth in disaster survivors (Jang and LaMendola 2008). These
findings build on Nathanson’s (2003) argument that spirituality has throughout human history
been a quest to find meaning and purpose from the unavoidable condition of suffering.
Tedeschi and Calhoun (1995) echo this ‘spiritual resilience’(Peres 2007) with the argument that
religious beliefs can even offer survivors positive outlooks on disasters events. This concept of
spiritual ‘empowerment’ in the disaster context is evident in Falk’s (2010) study on Buddhist
monks affected by the 2004 tsunami. Although not a direct line of argument, Falk describes
Buddhist monks as being able to turn around to help others recover through physical aid and
emotional appeasement with rituals and religious teachings. The observation of personal
resilience from cultivated spirituality is highlighted as an important factor for both personal and
community recovery. Although this is a new perspective on disaster resilience, it has been
forthcoming especially from the studies of religious clergy in disaster recovery (Feldbush 2007;
Tilakaratne 2009). However, spirituality is not limited to religious clergy. In countries like Sri
Lanka where the majority of the population are religious and there are long standing religious
and spiritual traditions, spiritual resilience maybe a more common phenomenon.
4. Buddhist spirituality and disaster resilience
Specific to the Buddhist spirituality, there are two key practices that contribute towards a
practitioner’s resilience towards disasters.
The first key practice is the meditation on disasters as dependent arising (Paticcasamuppāda)
phenomena. This practice is fundamental to the elimination to what Buddhists refer to as
attachment, because according to the principles of dependant arising, neither the disasters nor
human beings have self nature. Both exist as result of co-dependent and arising conditions.
Thus nothing can exist by its own will or determine its own development; instead everything
arises because of a web of favourable condition and will demise the same way. Therefore, in
the Buddhist worldview there are no Gods commanding over storms, or emotions that can
persist forever or suffering that can be owned.

This is what the Buddhist term empty of self nature, where practitioners are able to embody the
view that their physical body are mere results of a biological mechanism sustained on food and
rest; their mental existence in a similar way sustained by sensory perceptions processed by the
brain. According to Buddhist teachings these two phenomena provides an illusion of the
existence of self. Therefore the idea that ‘I’ exist is merely a delusion dependant on the body’s
ability to sense and brain’s ability to think.
In light of this, a keen Buddhist practitioner can have stronger emotional resilience to disasters
because they are less influenced by the attachments to self and more immune through the idea
that there are no losses they can ultimately own. Practitioners instead see disaster as the natural
unfolding of conditions outside of their will and control. This brings about the second key
practice of Buddhist spirituality that contributes to disaster resilience. If the practice of
dependant arising is the way Buddhist are taught to see, the practice of compassion (karuna) is
the way Buddhist are taught to act.
In the cultivation of karuna, one has to be fully engaged in the body, mind and speech. This
means actively giving others happiness, alleviating their suffering and also having compassion
on oneself. This concept, although almost universally understood is rarely practiced seriously.
The Buddhist approach to disaster recovery would be driven from the principle of karuna. This
is unlike many other secular approaches that would find karuna not a serious enough attitude to
management and would easily prefer driving the recovery process on survivor incentives or
efficiencies based on measurable outcomes. These two paradigms are ultimately conflicting
because while the Buddhist approach will be centred on principles and values attributing to the
cultivation towards enlightenment; motivations from self-interests and incentives will be seen
from the Buddhist perspective as cultivating human greed.
In the Buddhist approach, a compassionate recovery leads to personal and community
resilience. If karuna is a shared principle between the NGO and survivors, not only are people
engaged in their own recovery but are also engaged in the recovery of their neighbours and
community. If this concept is taken seriously and engineered into the human processes of
recovery, survivors can be empowered to help others in a form of personal empowerment and
resilience. In a community where the spirit of reciprocity is healthy, a natural resilience is also
nurtured through mutual care and assistance.
5. Buddhist spirituality and disaster recovery in practice
Two Buddhist NGOs that take their Buddhist practices seriously in disaster recovery are
Savordaya Shramadana Movement in Sri Lanka and Buddhist Compassion Relief Tzu Chi
Foundation from Taiwan.
Sarvodaya (which translates to the ‘awakening of all’) is the largest NGO in Sri Lanka involved
in development and disaster relief works. Established in 1958, Sarvodaya claims to have to date

worked in more than 15,000 villages across Sri Lanka and has built a strong relationship with
the local Buddhist monastic order as well as the Sri Lankan Singhalese Buddhist government.
Despite its size as an organisation, Sarvodaya is a NGO that focuses on the spiritual cultivation
of people through social engagement (Sarvodaya Shramadana Movement 2009). Volunteers,
staffs and community members are encouraged to cultivate their spirituality through
participation in Sarvodaya projects and develop the eight human qualities taught by the Buddha
important for working towards enlightenment.
Metta – Loving kindness
Karuna – Compassionate action
Muditha – Altruistic joy
Upekkha – Equanimity
Dana – Sharing
Priyavachana – Pleasant language
Arthacharya – Constructive action
Samanathmata – Equality
The cultivation of these qualities are central to the ethos of Sarvodaya and form the backbone to
many of the decision making of the organisation; from the Buddhist clergy they work with, to
the programs and projects they choose to undertake.
Sarvodaya’s approach aims to empower and awaken people from the village level. This grassroots
movement is central to their attitude of transforming the least empowered people.
Through skills training, forming village cooperatives, building networked and inter-dependent
relationships with neighbouring villages, Sarvodaya hopes to awaken people, professionally,
politically and spiritually. Similar to the goal of the Buddha awakening people through his
teachings, Sarvodaya aims to awaken individuals, families and villages up to the national and
international level through Buddhism inspired action.
Through a people’s movement approach, disaster recovery is organic and locally resourced.
This helps to build relationships and bonds that encourage reciprocity and the spirit of social
engagement. This social network is an asset for the community and becomes the ingredient for
resilience when disaster strikes because it can bring people together to offer labour and
financial resources through donations and fundraising. Sarvodaya also invites monks and nuns
to participate in disaster recovery because of their local status as holy and respected people,
commanding leadership with their moral standing. Buddhist clergy has two important roles in
disaster recovery, firstly to encourage the people unaffected by the disaster to donate and
volunteer their services towards recovery and secondly to offer Dhamma counselling to the
emotional distraught.
Sarvodaya’s approach to disaster recovery and resilience is similar to that of the Taiwanese
Buddhist Compassion Relief Tzu Chi Foundation. Their key commonalities are their Buddhist
principle driven operation philosophies and their objective to transform and empower people

through participation. Tzu Chi is the largest Buddhist disaster relief NGO in the world but
comes from very humble beginnings in Taiwan. Founded by Master Cheng-Yen in 1966 in the
poor rural area of Hualien, Taiwan, Tzu Chi is focused on the practice of Buddhism through
compassionate action.
At the core of Tzu Chi’s Buddhist philosophy and practice is the cultivation of ‘Great Love’
(Da Ai). The teaching and practice of Da Ai are the fundamental qualities that make Tzu Chi a
religious NGO. Tzu Chi has taken traditional Buddhist practices such as meditation and
chanting that focus on the cultivation of the inner mind and translated it into outer practices
through social engagement. In this way, Tzu Chi practitioners are learning, struggling and
embodying Buddhist ideas and philosophy through action. Thus the biggest difference between
Tzu Chi and many other secular NGOs is in their ultimate objective to transform people
through Da Ai. Activities, events and projects including disaster relief and reconstruction are
designed to ultimately influence the way people live, relate to one another and think about this
world.
Tzu Chi has revolutionised traditional Buddhist practices by shifting the focus from Buddhist
studies to responding to the real sufferings in society. This secularising of Buddhist practice
follows Master Cheng-Yen’s vision to move Buddhists from studying the Sutra to practicing the
Sutra (Sutra are teachings of the Shakyamuni Buddha).
“Rather than reading the Sutra, better to practice the Sutra. Sutra means path, this path
provides the way.” (Li 2010)
Master Cheng Yen has used key sections of Buddhist teachings on becoming a Bodhisattva as
central to the Tzu Chi operation philosophy. Bodhisattvas, often depicted as saintly figures,
describe particular practitioners that have taken the vow to seek enlightenment for the benefit of
others. In order to be a Bodhisattva, practitioners must attain Bodhicitta, which is a state of
mind that has Da Ai on all living beings equally and without fail. This is very difficult to
achieve and hence the reason people in Tzu Chi are often encouraged to aspire towards it,
calling their members Bodhisattvas as reminder to cultivate their Da Ai.
The practice of Da Ai plays a significant role in Tzu Chi’s approach to disaster relief and
recovery. In aspiring to become Bodhisattvas, volunteers or staffs are not only carrying out an
organisational task but more precisely on a vocation towards their ultimate enlightenment
through doing the work of Tzu Chi (which directly translates as ‘compassion relief’).
In the context of Tzu Chi’s approach to international disaster relief and recovery, Master Cheng
Yen has her own philosophy – reconstruction is intertwined in the holistic process of recovery
which involves firstly, ‘settling the body’ then ‘settling the mind’ and finally ‘settling life and
livelihood’. These three key phrases summaries Tzu Chi’s approach to disaster recovery and
outlines their belief that physical, emotional and spiritual recovery are inseparable.

Starting from attending to the recovery of the physical body which includes medical attention,
food, clothes and shelter; recovery must then continue to care for the mind and the heart
through psychological counselling, spiritual healing and empowerment. At Tzu Chi this is
achieved by transforming survivors into volunteers. After which recovery must continue to
restore mechanisms for supporting a new life and creating livelihood so families can thrive. Tzu
Chi’s approach to disaster management must also be coupled with the practice of Da Ai. For the
Tzu Chi volunteers, working to become a Bodhisattva, one must constantly practice and
encourage others to practice mutual appreciation, respect and love. These attitudes are best
practiced in post disaster situation through the engagement between volunteers and survivors.
Tzu Chi has a famous practice that sets themselves apart from other NGOs; they exemplify
respect to survivors through bending their backs low and offering blankets and food with both
hand to every survivor.
“So we need to from the bottom of our heart appreciate them (survivors)!... this is the
inner most spirit…we have to talk about this otherwise people will misunderstand and
think Tzu Chi is about a show… in the end, it is still up to the person to really embody
the philosophy to understand it” (Architect for Tzu Chi tsunami houses, interview 2011
Jan 8)
For Tzu Chi, their ultimate goal is to have their volunteers practice these attitudes and
principles and inspire the survivors to return the same Da Ai in a cycle of love. Thus the gauge
for the success of a project is whether there are people who were once receivers of aid
becoming empowered to be givers of aid, continuing to spread and practice the philosophy of
Da Ai as a seed of love. This is part of the reason why Tzu Chi’s disaster relief team has
included in their principles - be the first to arrive at the disaster but last to leave. As a religious
NGO, Master Cheng Yen’s vision is for Da Ai to transcend all religions and move towards a
philosophy of fundamental respect, love and appreciation of all living beings.
6. Conclusion
A Buddhist approach to disaster recovery and resilience is unlike any other approaches because
of the fundamental goal to attain enlightenment. This primary objective sits on top of the
projects and programs as these activities become vehicles to engage people, whether staff,
volunteers, affected community and survivors to cultivate their transformative qualities for
enlightenment. Thus where secular approaches have their focus on the recovery project, such as
the efficiency of their staff and effectiveness of their three or five year program; Buddhist
approaches are concerned about getting involved as many people as possible in the recovery
process so more people can be influenced to practice Buddhism. The ultimate measure of
success of a Buddhist approach is whether people are awakened to their potentials as a human
being to have the qualities such as loving kindness, compassionate action and equality. Only
though the cultivation of these principles can people develop spiritually and allow communities
to be more resilient through individuals empowered to love themselves and others.

References
Bond, GD (2003), 'Buddhism at Work: Community Development, Social Empowerment, and
the Sarvodaya Movement', 2004.01. 01, 158.
Davis, I and Wall, M (1992), Christian perspectives on disaster management: A training manual
(Interchurch Relief and Development Alliance).
De Silva, P (2006), 'The tsunami and its aftermath in Sri Lanka: Explorations of a Buddhist
perspective', International Review of Psychiatry, 18 (3), 281-87.
Dombrowsky, Wolf R. (2006), 'Again and Again - Is a disaster what we call a "disaster"?', in
Havidan Rodriguez, Enrico L. Quarantelli, and Russell R. Dynes (eds.), Handbook of Disaster
Research (New York: Springer), 1-15.
Falk, ML (2010), 'Recovery and Buddhist practices in the aftermath of the Tsunami in Southern
Thailand', Religion.
Feldbush, MW (2007), 'The Role of Clergy in Responding to Disaster Events', Southern
Medical Journal, 100 (9), 942.
Gyatso, GK (2005), How to Solve Our Human Problems: The Four Noble Truths (Tharpa
Publications).
Jang, L and LaMendola, WF (2008), 'Social Work in Natural Disasters: The Case of Spirituality
and Post-traumatic Growth', Advances in Social Work, 8 (2), 305.
Jones, K (1989), The social face of Buddhism: An approach to political and social activism
(Wisdom, London).
Li, Guo Zheng (2011), 'Tzu Chi, the interpretation of "Big Love"',
, accessed May 7.
Mileti, DS (1999), Disasters by design (Joseph Henry Press).
Nathanson, I (2003), 'Spirituality and the life cycle', Religious organizations in community
services: A social work perspective, 63-77.
Oliver-Smith, Anthony (2002), 'Theorizing Disasters - Nature, Power, and Culture', in Susanna
Hoffman and Anthony Oliver-Smith (eds.), Catastrophe & culture : the anthropology of disaster
(Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research Press), xii, 312 p.

Peres, Julio F.P, Alexander, Moreira-Almeida, Antonia Gladys. Nasello, Harold G. Koenig
(2007), 'Spirituality and Resilience in Trauma Victims', Journal of Religion and Health, 46 (3),
343-50.
Quarantelli, EL (1988), 'Conceptualizing disasters from a sociological perspective'.
Quarantelli, EL (1998), What is a disaster?: perspectives on the question (Routledge).
Rosenthal, Uriel (2006), 'Future Disasters, Future Definitions', in Havidan Rodriguez, Enrico L.
Quarantelli, and Russell R. Dynes (eds.), Handbook of Disaster Research (New York:
Springer), 1-15.
Sarvodaya Shramadana Movement (2009), 'Buddhist Philosophy and Community Action: The
Sarvodaya Experience in Sri Lanka', (Tokyo).
Tedeschi, RG and Calhoun, LG (1995), Trauma & transformation: Growing in the aftermath of
suffering (Sage Publications, Inc).
Tilakaratne, Asanga (2009), 'Working with Tsunami-affected People in the South: Stories
Towards Rebuilding Life by Strengthening the Mind', in N De Mel, KN Ruwanpura, and G
Samarasinghe (eds.), After the waves: the impact of the tsunami on women in Sri Lanka (Social
Scientist Association).