Hadith 647

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَحْيَى ، أَنْبَأَنَا عَبْدُ الرَّزَّاقِ ، أَنْبَأَنَا مَعْمَرٌ ، عَنْ أَيُّوبَ ، عَنِ ابْنِ سِيرِينَ ، عَنْ أُمِّ عَطِيَّةَ ، قَالَتْ : " لَمْ نَكُنْ نَرَى الصُّفْرَةَ ، وَالْكُدْرَةَ شَيْئًا " .
´It was narrated that Umm 'Atiyyah said:` "We did not think anything of the yellowish or brownish discharge." (Sahih) (Another chain) It was narrated that Umm 'Atiyyah said: "We did not think that the yellowish or brownish discharge counted for anything." Muhammad bin Yahya said: "Wuhaib (who narrated the second version) is the better of them with this according to us."
Hadith Reference سنن ابن ماجه / أبواب التيمم / 647
Hadith Grading الألبانی: صحيح  |  زبیر علی زئی: صحيح بخاري
Hadith Takhrij « صحیح البخاری/الحیض 25 ( 326 ) ، سنن ابی داود/الطہارة 119 ( 308 ) ، سنن النسائی/الحیض 7 ( 368 ) ، ( تحفة الأشراف : 18096 ، 18123 ) ، وقد أخرجہ : سنن الدارمی/الطہارة 94 ( 895 ) ( صحیح ) »
Explanation & Benefits
Maulana Ataullah Sajid
(1)
The meaning is that, in our view, that was not considered menstruation (hayd). In the first hadith, it is mentioned that this ruling is after purification; if, after yellowish or brownish discharge, red blood appears again, then all of this will be counted as menstruation (hayd).

(2)
Imam Ibn Majah rahimahullah’s teacher, Muhammad bin Yahya rahimahullah, has narrated this hadith through two chains of transmission. In one chain, Ayub narrated this hadith from Ibn Sirin rahimahullah, who heard it from Umm ‘Atiyyah radi Allahu anha, whereas in the other chain, there is the intermediary of Hafsah between Ayub and Umm ‘Atiyyah radi Allahu anha. Muhammad bin Yahya gave preference to the second chain; however, this difference does not affect the authenticity of the hadith, because both Ibn Sirin and Hafsah are trustworthy and reliable.
Source: Commentary on Sunan Ibn Mājah by Mawlānā ‘Atā’ullāh Sājid, Page: 647