In the present essay, first, the most important arguments for proving the theory of "substantial movement" are analyzed and criticized. Two of them are rejected by the aid of some contemporary critics and the rest by initiative critiques. Then Molla Sadra’s interpretations that are under the influence of the mentioned theory are criticized. In order to do so, those Qora’nic verses which are conformed by him to that theory are gathered. Taking into consideration other Qora’nic verses and traditions, their apparent meaning, as well as features of the theory of "substantial movement", quoterd in philosophy, truth or untruth of their conformity to this theory is clarified and it is concluded that none of the Sadra’s interpretations based on that theory could be confirmed.