I believe the early Jains criticised the Buddha's emphasis on intention in the role of Kamma. I recall reading about this somewhere. The argument went something similar to this:
Imagine there is a baby wrapped in a blanket. The Buddhist thinking it is a large durian fruit stabs it several times with a knife, killing the baby. According to Buddhist theory there would be no kammic consequences generated because there was no intention to kill.
Now imagine there is a durian fruit and the Buddhist thinking it is a baby stabs it several times with the intention to kill. Buddhist theory would have that there are kammic consequences even though no harm was done.
Does anyone know where this debate occurs and what the Buddhist response was?