I think that's another great example of stuff we only "know" indirectly. There's no direct evidence that Magid Mesharim was written by R' Karo or that he was even aware of it.
Sha'ar kitvei mori purports to be a collection of writings by the Ari, and I'm unaware of any serious scholar who doubts it. On the other hand it's only in the mid 1800s that people started taking chronology seriously, and noticing anachronisms in Talmud Bavli (as printed) as well as the Zohar.
Interesting. I wasn't actually familiar with that title, but I see (https://seforimcenter.com/Etz-Chaim---Shaar-1--Shaar-Kitvei-Mori-Ahavat-Shalom-Edition__p-11330.aspx) that it's published as part of Eitz Chaim. And that's presented as "Shaar Kitvei Mori of Rabbi Yitzchak Luria, arranged by his student Rabbi Chaim Vital" - so, at best, it's filtered through R' Chaim Vital (and probably then through R' Shmuel Vital).
Isn't the bigger 'issue' with R Karo is that he thought he communicated with a maggid?
I think that's another great example of stuff we only "know" indirectly. There's no direct evidence that Magid Mesharim was written by R' Karo or that he was even aware of it.
Sha'ar kitvei mori purports to be a collection of writings by the Ari, and I'm unaware of any serious scholar who doubts it. On the other hand it's only in the mid 1800s that people started taking chronology seriously, and noticing anachronisms in Talmud Bavli (as printed) as well as the Zohar.
Interesting. I wasn't actually familiar with that title, but I see (https://seforimcenter.com/Etz-Chaim---Shaar-1--Shaar-Kitvei-Mori-Ahavat-Shalom-Edition__p-11330.aspx) that it's published as part of Eitz Chaim. And that's presented as "Shaar Kitvei Mori of Rabbi Yitzchak Luria, arranged by his student Rabbi Chaim Vital" - so, at best, it's filtered through R' Chaim Vital (and probably then through R' Shmuel Vital).