Doing evil knowingly and unknowingly

In the Milindapanha, Nagasena points out to king Milinda that doing evil knowingly accrues lesser demerit than doing evil unknowingly. Does the Buddha make the same statement anywhere in the Suttas? >The king asked: "Venerable Nagasena, for whom is the greater demerit, one who knowingly does evil, or one who does evil unknowingly?" > >The elder replied: "Indeed, your majesty, for him who does evil not knowing is the greater demerit." > >"In that case, venerable Nagasena, would we doubly punish one who is our prince or king's chief minister who not knowing does evil?" > >"What do you think, your majesty, who would get burned more, one who knowing picks up a hot iron ball, ablaze and glowing, or one who not knowing picks it up?" > >"Indeed, venerable sir, he who not knowing picks it up would get burned more." > >"Indeed, your majesty, in the same way the greater demerit is for him who does evil not knowing." > >"You are clever, venerable Nagasena." Milindapanha - Access to Insight My interpretation of this is not about unintended action vs intended action as one of the answers suggests. Instead I see it as comparing intended action with the view that the action is unwholesome vs intended action with the view that the action is wholesome. It's not about intending harm vs not intending harm, instead it's about intending harm knowing that causing harm is bad vs intending harm not knowing that causing harm is bad.