The difference between a person knowing the ruling that follows from his action and a person knowing that he is in violation.

The Shaykh : It is not required that he be aware of the ruling that follows from it; there is a difference between the two? It is required that he be aware of his violation, but it is not required that he be aware of what follows from it. Do you understand? I mean, if a person commits disbelief, may Allah protect us from that, or commits open sinfulness by drinking intoxicants, and he does not know that he will be punished, is the punishment dropped from him? No. The evidence for this is the story of the man who had intercourse during the day of Ramadan while not knowing what would follow from it, until he came to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and said: "O Messenger of Allah, I am ruined." He said: "What has ruined you?" He said: "I had intercourse with my wife in Ramadan while I was fasting." He did not know what would follow from it, but he knew that it was forbidden, as indicated by his statement: So the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) explained to him the expiation.
Another example: If a man commits unlawful sexual intercourse and he is a married man who knows that unlawful sexual intercourse is forbidden, but he does not know whether he will be stoned or not, will he be stoned or not? He will be stoned, yes, because he knew that it was forbidden and he violated the prohibition, so he is stoned. This is also "it is necessary that in the violation, he be aware of his violation which necessitated that he be an open sinner or a disbeliever".