I just want to chime in regard to CIMA. I am doing it careful as my last experience here in this forum I was trying to gain favor, and fell flat on my face.
Having much experience in CIMA and CEMA and various teachers for many years, I think what Finny is saying should be looked at closer. CMA can't agree what internal, how true this is! And it is not as simple of a matter of the opinion of zealots. It is a very dynamic issue that includes Chinese history, culture, education, language, philosophy, location, amoung other things including what you point out, all have an influnence on what internal is determined to be, much less comparing something that itself can't be decided on, to anything else. And I agree, if you where to compare then what CIMA is the model? Is it Xingyiquan, or ...? I went down this road.
There are reams of books, articles, and countless forum debates on this issue and it really can't be reduced to what seems to be the obvious plane of thought or discussion. Basically, am saying your statement presents a great difficulty and complexity.
