In this article, we want to bring forth a particular problematic of political theory and set it against a historical moment in South Asia. The problematic is one that we are familiar with. There have been many examples in the past of ethnic nationalisms. All such nationalisms, it is argued, have propagated a narrow view of collective identity. This has played itself out historically through violent programs and forced expulsions. Ethnic nationalism is considered incompatible with freedom of conscience within a nation. There is a lot of truth to this as we can’t ignore history. Fascism and Nazism are primary examples of ethnic nationalisms which have perpetuated injustice and violence to people. However, in this article, we want to present an alternative case for how ethnic nationalism doesn’t necessarily have to lead to exclusion. We will review a particular historical example of a political blue-print for a nation given by Abul Hashim (along with some of his compatriots) in Bengal. He argued for a form of ethnic nationalism – in the sense of having a religious state while still maintaining that there can be freedom of conscience. He didn’t say there can be absolute freedom of conscience. But he still argued there can be freedom which is internal to the ethnic life-world which allows people to espouse different faiths.