Is the husband's statement: "It is unlawful for me for him to enter my house" considered an oath, in the context of his swearing that the wife's brother will not enter their house?

What the husband uttered is a suspension of the prohibition of his wife from allowing her brother into their home; if the brother enters, the prohibition takes effect. This prohibition leads to a disagreement among scholars, and the preponderant opinion is that it depends on the husband's intention: whether he intended divorce, ẓihār, or an oath. If the prohibition was for a reason and that reason ceased to exist, then no breach of the oath occurs, and nothing results from it. This wording constitutes a suspended oath, and what the husband intended becomes binding. Anger must be avoided, as it is the key to evil, and an angry person is held accountable as long as he has not lost consciousness. In-laws should maintain their relationship and avoid causing separation.