I most certainly did not reference "DQ=sq" in any of these posts; that is another bit of misrepresentation on your part.
Trouble with your longer term memory Marsha? I invite anyone to dive into the archives where you have made that statement...more than once. Your reference to 'these posts' is your attempt at evasion (which is a usual tactic on your part). I am therefore not misrepresenting your belief. In fact, you once again state it:
"So to static quality does not differ from Dynamic Quality, and Dynamic Quality does not differ from static quality".
This may be true from a 'mystical' perspective but we are talking MOQ here which has a pragmatic, radical empiricist component in it. And for good reason. I invite you and any of your mystic friends to experience the difference between diving, head first, in a pool of water as contrasted with diving in a pool filled with ice. (amazing what difference one degree Celsius in temperature can make)
Sorry Marsha, not very convincing. I am afraid we are living in the temporal/spacial world of everyday affairs. You know, buying,selling,sneezing,working,fucking,farting,painting,thinking,dying...just to name a few. It is the world of everyday, conventional reality. That's the one we are living in and Pirsig's MOQ as a description of this temporal/spacial reality is brilliant because it incorporates everything (sq) and refers to nothing (DQ). ;-)