The term of Hyalo (matter) is as much current in philosophical discussions that its existence has become a definitive hypothesis, so there is no attention to proofs affirms its being. The critical approach to philosophers' viewpoints reveals significant faults in these reasoning. In ontological philosophy three proofs for affirmation of Hyalo are used: Fasl wa Vasl proof (connection and disconnection)-Takhalkhol and Takathof proof (distension and condensation)-Qovveh and Fe’al Proof (potentiality and actuality). However, all of them involve in an important methodological problem. These philosophers have observed natural world by trusting on external senses, so they have gone beyond metaphysics and have put experimental and material extensions as the base of metaphysical principals. They have chosen a particular definition of “Material Physique” (jism) and then have presented the proofs that are not correct. Therefore, we can declare two classes of faults in these proofs; one of them is common in all these three and the second one depends on every one separately. So, all of the Hyalo’s affirmative proofs and arguments that depend on them are wrong. Thus, we should review some philosophical arguments, such as substantial movement etc
)