from using it—should he perform tayammum (dry ablution) in place of this ghusl, or should we say that it is an obligation waived by his inability to perform it?

The answer is the latter. This was the view preferred by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy on him. Shaykh al-Islam says: With regard to all recommended ghusls, if a person is unable to perform them, he does not perform tayammum in their place, because tayammum was legislated only for ritual impurity, as Allah the Exalted says:

“But if you are ill, or on a journey, or one of you comes from relieving himself, or you have had contact with women and cannot find water, then seek clean earth and wipe your faces and hands with it. Allah does not intend to impose hardship upon you, but He intends to purify you.” [al-Ma'idah 5:6]

It is well known that recommended ghusls are not for purification, since there is no ritual impurity from which one needs to be purified. Accordingly, if a person reaches the miqat intending to perform Umrah or Hajj and cannot find water, or finds it but it is so cold that he cannot use it, or is ill, then—on this basis—he does not perform tayammum.

The jurists, may Allah have mercy on them, say that he should perform tayammum, but what is correct is contrary to that.

“And it has preceded, ...”

His statement, “And it has preceded,” means that the recommendation of ghusl for Friday has already been mentioned.

However, the author of al-Rawd said, “There is room for consideration in this.” When scholars say, “There is room for consideration in this,” they mean that it is not accepted. Scholars sometimes use the expression, “There is something in it,” when reporting the words of others.

Their saying, “There is something in it,” is milder than saying, “There is room for consideration in this.” Thus, the author of al-Rawd’s statement, “There is room for consideration in this,” means that there is room for consideration in the author’s statement, “And it has preceded,”