All that is required is a process to reach progressively subtle understanding in action.
Which process is not going to really be words on the internet, though... for one thing. For another thing, the obvious lack of success with what many westerners *thought* was traditional training (perhaps too quickly) more than strongly suggests that the perceived "process" needs to be examined. Ellis Amdur's proposed thesis about "Hidden in Plain Sight" highlights the possibility that the perceived process might have not been the real process but a process coloured by other factors.
In short, it is wrong to over-extend anyone's own experience as a hard-wired template for the development of others. A point which is NOT mundane precisely because the tendency to do so is all too common and thus goes unrecognized or unquestioned. This may be one reason for the lack of detailed explanation or repetition offered by the Founder of the art. One's own experience can only be a point of beginning to another one trying to follow.
Oh, pooh. The elements of the ki/kokyu skills, etc., permeate Asian martial arts. The idea that this stuff is unique to Aikido and Daito Ryu is flabbergasting, given how many demonstrations of the same "ki tricks" are found in every city in Asia with a decent martial arts school. The near-mystical perspective of correct training of these basic skills and how hard it is to do is simply overwhelmed by the numbers. Following some "traditional rituals" with the idea that "one day it will come" doesn't sound very encouraging, particularly when Ueshiba himself seems to have been involved in teaching a few people the essence of these skills in only a matter of months (supposedly).