Gitin page 29a

I would like to share here what I think Tosphot means in Gitin page 29a first words “words are not handed to a messenger.” I believe he is trying to say that the Gemara on page 29 is the polar opposite of the Gemara on page 67b. Here on page 29, he holds that Shmuel hold like R. Meir and that the reason of R. Meir in the Mishna is because of embarrassment of the husband. However, a possible problem with this is that instead of answering our question on Shmuel we change to changing the opinion of Shmuel completely. to explain what I mean here let me explain. On page 67 the Mishna says that if one says to two people to give a get to his wife or to three to write and give it, they cannot ask someone else to do so, they must do so themselves. But if he says to three to give a get to his wife, R. Meir says he intends to make them into a court, and so they can appoint someone else to do so. R Jose says even in that case they must do it themselves. Then Shmuel said if one said to two to write and give a get, and they told a scribe to write it, and they signed it is invalid. However, this still requires study. And he also said the reason for R. Jose is words are not given over to a messenger, and that is the law. On page 29 there is a Mishna that a person appointed to bring a get can give it to another to do so. The Gemara asks does this not contradict the Mishna on page 67 where he cannot make a messenger. Abaye answered our question: the reason for page 67 is embarrassment of the husband. Rava say the reason for page 67 is words cannot be handed over to a messenger. And the Gemara concludes, that Rav and Shmuel disagree about the same principles for in terms of a document of a gift, Rav said it is unlike a get and Shmuel said it is like a get. Tosphot asks on page 67b Shmuel hold the law is words cannot be handed over to a messenger, but there is a slight possibility that they can be handed to a messenger. On page 29 the Gemara is clear that Shmuel has no doubt. The law is words cannot be handed over. I think Tosphot answers that the reason for R. Meir in the Mishna in the first two cases is embarrassment of the husband and Shmuel agrees with that so when he says write and give a get he means only to sign it. He is not referring to writing it because being unable to write a get is no embarrassment. On the intension of the husband was for them to sign which they did.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I would like to share here what I think תוספות means in גיטין page 29a first words “מילי לא מימסרן לשליח.” I believe he is trying to say that the גמרא on page 29 is the polar opposite of the גמרא on page 67b. Here on page 29, he holds that שמואל hold like ר’ מאיר and that the reason of ר’ מאיר in the משנה is because of embarrassment of the husband. However, a possible problem with this is that instead of answering our question on שמואל we change to changing the opinion of שמואל completely. To explain what I mean here let me explain. On page 67 the משנה says that if one says to two people to give a גט to his wife or to three to write and give it, they cannot ask someone else to do so. They must do so themselves. But if he says to three to give a גט to his wife, ר’ מאיר says he intends to make them into a court, and so they can appoint someone else to do so. ר' יוסי says even in that case they must do it themselves. Then שמואל said if one said to two to write and give a גט, and they told a scribe to write it, and they signed it is invalid. However, this still requires study. And he also said the reason for ר' יוסי is words are not given over to a messenger, and that is the law. On page 29 there is a משנה that a person appointed to bring a גט can give it to another to do so. The גמרא asks does this not contradict the משנה on page 67 where he cannot make a messenger. אביי answered our question: the reason for page 67 is embarrassment of the husband. רבא say the reason for page 67 is words cannot be handed over to a messenger. And the גמרא concludes, that רב and שמואל disagree about the same principles for in terms of a document of a gift, רב said it is unlike a גט and שמואל said it is like a גט. תוספות asks on page 67b שמואל hold the law is words cannot be handed over to a messenger, but there is a slight possibility that they can be handed to a messenger. On page 29 the גמרא is clear that שמואל has no doubt. The law is words cannot be handed over. I think תוספות answers that the reason for ר’ מאיר in the משנה in the first two cases is embarrassment of the husband and שמואל agrees with that so when he says write and give a גט he means only to sign it. He is not referring to writing it because being unable to write a גט is no embarrassment. On the intension of the husband was for them to sign which they did.