What is the ruling on someone whose mother swore an oath upon him to eat food, while he had previously sworn an oath not to eat from it without her knowledge of his oath, and is he obliged to fulfill his mother's oath or his own?

The son should eat from the food and expiate for his oath, acting in a way that pleases his mother and fulfills the oath. This is because the Lawgiver encouraged fulfilling an oath as long as there is no corruption or sin involved.

If he does not obey her, then the expiation is binding upon the one who swore the oath (the mother), because she is the one who broke the oath. This is the view of the majority of jurists.