to the Ummah of Muhammad ﷺ is meant for the Ummah of response, whereas anything beyond that pertains to the Ummah of invitation.

Scholarly disagreement:
Abu Hanifah, al-Shafiʿi, Ahmad, and their respective followers consider it recommended in wudu to wash beyond the strictly obligatory limits. This is the view of the majority of scholars, and they cite as evidence the remainder of the hadith under discussion: “Whoever among you is able to lengthen his facial blaze, let him do so.”
Al-Nawawi states: “Our companions are unanimously agreed that one should wash above the elbows and ankles.”

Imam Malik and the scholars of Madinah, however, hold that exceeding the prescribed area is not recommended. This is also one of the two reports from Imam Ahmad, a view preferred by Shaykh al-Islam, Ibn al-Qayyim, and, among contemporary scholars, by Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibrahim Al al-Shaykh, Shaykh ʿAbd al-Rahman al-Saʿdi, Shaykh ʿAbd al-ʿAziz ibn Baz, and others.

They argue as follows:
First: Claiming that going beyond the obligatory limits is an act of worship requires proof.
Second: All those who described the Prophet’s ﷺ wudu mention that he washed the face, the hands up to the elbows, and the feet up to the ankles—no more.
Third: The Qur’anic verse on wudu fixes the obligation at the elbows and ankles, and it is among the last passages to be revealed.
Fourth: Even if one were to concede the point, consistency would demand extending the washing of the face up onto part of the scalp—yet this additional area is not called a facial blaze (ghurrah); hence the argument collapses.
Fifth: The hadith itself does not indicate elongation, for jewelry is worn on the forearm and wrist, not on the upper arm or shoulder.
Sixth: As for the wording, “Whoever among you can lengthen his facial blaze and limb-whiteness, let him do so,” this addition is inserted into the hadith from Abu Hurayrah’s own words, not from the Prophet ﷺ, as appears in the narration of Ahmad (8208), a point clarified by several hadith masters.