The gemara asks on 13b what's the reason why according to reb akiva he says by Misah and malkus you only get 1 punishment? and the gemara answers that he holds of Kedei Rishaso. So Then the Gemara asks that according to reb Shmuel what does he do with this passuk, and the Gemara answers that this passuk is only reffering to Misah and Mamaon or malkus and Mamon however Misah and malkus it's considered one long Misah and you can get both. My question is after this the gemara has got a problem with reb akiva that according to him which learns from the passuk of Kedei Rishaso that whenever you have 2 punishments you give the stricter one, so if so by Chayevei Kerisus as well you should only give him 1 punishment so now my problem is that why couldnt the Gemara ask a similar question on reb Shmuel that according to reb Shmuel who learns that the passuk of Kedei Rishaso is speaking about Misah and Mamon or malkus and Mamon however Misah and malkus is considered as 1 long Misah (because they are both a punishment on the Guf of the and therefore you can get both. So the Gemara should ask that Kares and malkus are also 2 separate punishments so why according to reb Shmuel do you get both???
(And if you are going to tell me that Kares and malkus is considered somehow one punishment then the Gemara should have added this in its answer when it says Aval Misah u'Malkus Misah Arichta Hi)
Benzi, London
1) The Rambam writes, in Perush ha'Mishnayos at the very beginning of this chapter, that after someone receives Malkus and does Teshuvah, he becomes exempt from Kares. So if he received Malkus, Rebbi Yishmael will agree that he does not also get Kares.
2) However, a closer look at the Sugya suggests that the above reply is not correct, because Rebbi Yishmael's opinion is that one gets Malkus and Kares, and this would apply if one did not do Teshuvah.
I want to say a different answer. Just as Rebbi Yishmael holds that Misah and Malkus are considered as one long Misah, he also holds that Kares and Malkus is considered as one long Misah. Therefore, the Gemara asked only on Rebbi Akiva, that since he holds that you do not give him two punishments, he should also hold that if he gets Kares he should not get Malkus. But we do not have the same question on Rebbi Yishmael, because if he gets Kares and Malkus it is considered that he only got one punishment, since Malkus and Kares is considered one long Misah.
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom
So this leads on to my next problem that if Kares and malkus is one punishment then the Gemara should have added this in its answer when it says Aval Misah u'Malkus Misah Arichta Hi and the gemara should have said that misa and malkus and Kares and malkus is one punishment?
Kares is a sort of Misah, so when the Gemara states that Misah and Malkus is one punishment, this also includes the fact that Kares and Malkus are one punishment. See Tosfos to Yevamos 2a (DH Eishes) in the name of the Riva who says that the difference between Kares and Misah at the hands of Heaven is that Kares is at age 50 and Misah b'Yedei Shamayim at 60.
However, there is a lot in this Sugya and a lot behind your important question.
1) First, I will say that I found, bs'd, that there seems to be a Machlokes Acharonim about whether or not we say that Kares and Malkus is a Misah Arichta. The Hafla'ah on Kesuvos 30b (DH bi'Gemara Mai Ika) writes that the Sevara of Misah Arichta does not apply for Kares or for Misah at the hands of Heaven.
2) The Beis Yakov (by the author of the Nesivos ha'Mishpat) there (beginning of Kesuvos 30b) disagrees with the Hafla'ah, but for a different reason. He cites our Gemara in Makos 13b, "You condemn him because of one Rish'ah but you do not condemn him because of two Risha'os." The Beis Yakov learns from the word "you" that this is a command on Beis Din and therefore does not apply to a punishment Min ha'Shamayim. It follows that if one of the punishments is given by Beis Din and one of the punishments is given by Shamayim, the whole Derashah of "Kedei Rish'aso" does not apply and two punishments may be given. Therefore, one can have Malkus and Kares according to the Beis Yakov.
3) I cited the above dispute between the Hafla'ah and the Beis Yakov more in the way of an introduction to our Sugya in Makos. The Maharsha here seems to learn that Misah Arichta does not apply to Kares and Malkus, like the Hafla'ah. In fact, the Maharsha asks your original question, Benzi, but he asks it a bit later in the Sugya.
4) Rava said (on the first wide line of the Gemara), "If they gave him a warning for the capital punishment, everyone agrees that he does not get both Malkus and Misah." The Maharsha writes that this is because of Kedei Rish'aso. The Maharsha asks that according to Rava, the question that the Gemara asked earlier on Rebbi Akiva -- "If so, Chayvaei Kerisus also?" -- will now be dfficult on everyone. This is your original question, Benzi, that the Gemara could have asked a similar question on Rebbi Yishmael!
5) The Maharsha writes that even if he was only warned about Malkus, this would be two Risha'os, because Kares does not require a warning. We see that the Maharsha does not agree with my answer that Kares and Malkus are a Misah Arichta. (See also the Rashash, who seems to hold that Kares and Malkus are a Misah Arichta.)
6) The Maharsha concludes, "v'Yesh l'Yashev b'Dochek." He does not explain how to do this. We will have to use our own heads!
B'Hatzlachah Rabah,
Dovid Bloom