┌─╷─┐ ╵┌┼┐╵ polyphanes.smol.pub ╷└┼┘╷ by polyphanes └─╵─┘
───╢※╟───
Bats and birds do not share any recent common evolutionary ancestor, but both evolved wings that do the same thing—flying—and end up looking awfully similar. Convergent evolution (or parallel evolution) is a thing! It doesn't make bats birds or vice versa, but they do the same thing in the same way. Just so are not all spiritual practices that aren't necessarily your own or "of your own culture" culturally appropriative; sometimes there are parallels that go way back, and sometimes you just do something that anyone can/should do and could have come up with.
To be sure, there are certainly times where cultural appropriation is indeed a problem, and often a major one at that! But far from everything that crosses cultural borders does so in a way of appropriation; sometimes it's cultural diffusion and exchange, sometimes respectful cross-cultural participation; sometimes it's just something for anyone to pick up and use without claims of ownership or propriety. There are also times where something makes a circuit through multiple cultures before ending back up where it started, having picked up more along the way. It becomes a shared cross-cultural phenomenon that nobody can lay claim to, and as such should be celebrated and enjoyed by all.
Appropriation comes into play when there is cultural/religious theft without attribution, denying people the use of something of their culture/religion while making it your own, or trespassing into something truly guarded and protected without license. These are real problems, and I would never say differently; if you didn't come by from the front door but by the bathroom window, if you didn't ask and weren't told you could have something that you know is under lock and key or which the owner doesn't like to share, then that's simply theft. Even still, however, not everything that comes from an out-group into your in-group does that. It's good to be aware of the origins of our practices, to cite our sources, to be respectful and educated about what is and isn't permissible across (already confusingly permeable) cultural boundaries.
Sometimes, a tool is just a tool or a practice is just a practice that works for everyone, and to decry its use as cultural appropriation/colonialism just because someone else came up with it can be as damaging as actual appropriation/colonialism, if not worse because it muddles actual appropriation/colonialism and deadens the impact of the real stuff going on out there. And the same thing goes by merely coming up with substitutes to sidestep it: in this case, if you're using the same logic with a different material, merely to avoid appropriation of the material, is it not also appropriation of the logic, too? The reasoning goes both ways!
Many cultures have their own takes on things, and there are some phenomena that are truly cross-cultural that nobody can truly claim. Hotswapping elements is eclecticism, and so long as you're not trespassing or stealing, that's generally okay, and how culture just *happens*. Convergent and parallel evolution happens in culture as much as it does bats and birds. That doesn't make bats birds or birds bats, and it doesn't make either a thief of wings or a trespasser of the skies; it just means that they can both fly for the same reason, to live.