The term 'Hinayana' refers to those Buddhists who mainly practice the Four Noble Truths2 and the Thirty-Seven Aids to Enlightenment3, and 'Mahayana' refers to those who also engage in the Six Paramitas and the Four Ways of Gathering Sentient Beings4. However, there is no scriptural basis for this distinction. In fact, the earliest Buddhist scriptures (the nikayas in Pali and the agamas in Sanskrit) encourage the practice of the Four Noble Truths and the Thirty-Seven Aids as well as the Six Paramitas. The early schools did not refer to themselves as Hinayana, and the term can be viewed as derogatory if used by Mahayanists to designate other Buddhists as practitioners of a lesser path.

Nevertheless, upon closer examination we do see a distinction between the two schools in that Mahayana Buddhism places a greater emphasis on generating a supreme altruistic intention to help others. This aspiration to alleviate the suffering of others without concern for one's own nirvana is the dnuttara (unsurpassed) bodhi-mind.5 While diligently practicing the Dharma, such a practitioner realizes that nirvana is not a blissful, abiding state in which one rejects samsara, the existential realm of suffering. Without rejecting or clinging to nirvana, a bodhisattva vows to return to worldly existence to help sentient beings. This is the correct scope of mind on the Mahayana path. As ideals of this we point to Manjusri, Bodhisattva of Wisdom; Samantabhadra, Bodhisattva of Great Actions and Great Functions; Avalokitesvara, Bodhisattva of Compassion; and Ksitigarbha, Bodhisattva of Great Vows. These great bodhisattvas vowed to help sentient beings reach liberation before attaining their own buddhahood. Therefore, if we must make a distinction between Hinayana and Mahayana, it should be based on the bodhisattva's more expansive scope of mind rather than on methods of practice.