let $R=\{$$ \left( \begin{matrix} a & a & a \\ a & a & a \\ a & a & a \end{matrix} \right)$$ | a \in\mathbb{R}\}$ now find the number of ideals of R.
I think the ring $R$ has exactly trivial ideal because let $I$ be a pure ideal of $R$ I claim that $I=R $ because $$ \left( \begin{matrix} 1& 1 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 & 1 \end{matrix} \right) \in I .$$
if we set $a\in \mathbb{Z_p}$ what is answer ?
Hint:
$\phi:\mathbb R\to R$ given by $\phi(a)=\frac{a}{3}\begin{bmatrix}1&1&1 \\ 1&1&1 \\ 1& 1&1\end{bmatrix}$ is an isomorphism of rings.
Your conclusion is right, but your reasoning doesn't make any sense.
The problems that stick out to me are
Why should $\begin{bmatrix} 1&1&1 \\ 1&1&1 \\ 1& 1&1\end{bmatrix}\in I$? You didn't explain.
Even if it is, why does it matter? Presumably you thought it was the identity (it isn't) or a unit (it is, but you didn't explain.)
If you use $\mathbb Z/p\mathbb Z$ instead of $\mathbb R$, the conclusion that there are only two ideals still holds if $p\neq 3$. But if $p=3$ then you are looking at a ring in which every pair of things multiplies to zero. In such a ring, the ideals are exactly the additive subgroups. Since it is still isomorphic to $\mathbb Z/3\mathbb Z$, there are only two such subgroups, but what you are looking at is not a field, but a nilpotent ring.
One less important thing: the word you're looking for is proper ideal, not "pure" ideal. I imagine a lot of ring/module theorists would think of pure submodules, even though they would probably guess you meant this far simpler thing.