I think it is clear that he did. I just wouldn't consider it a dichotomy. There is precedent for this training to effect you spiritually/mentally and for the training to be part a spiritual practice. It is unfortunate that some people do not understand that you can separate out physical models that stand on their own.
I guess I worry about the lumping of all of Ueshiba's practices into "this training." It appears to me that he learned aiki (in the IS, body skill sense) from Takeda. However, Takeda never made claims of enlightenment, while Ueshiba did, which makes me think that he either had slightly different practices, or completely different practices, for his enlightenment training.
A simple case in point: You don't have to chant prayers to effect breath resonance in the body. Vowel sounds divorced from a specific language will do the same thing. Both will help to identify connections in the body, but it is easy to see how someone could "use" or even "require" induction into a spiritual practice to get the same result. It isn't true that you needed to chant a prayer, but it is none the less their "requirement."
In the quote I offered -heretofore-not translated into English, we find Ueshiba as a teacher using the Kojiki to explain how someone should manifest in yo ho in the human anatomy. I could teach by using all anatomy or all spiritual metaphor to teach the same principles, or I could teach by kata in a system. It would all be the same to me....but it may leave the audience thinking I was daft...er...wait!!
So, it sounds like you are saying either Western physical anatomy or a spiritual framework can be used to as a vehicle to explain. . . Enlightenment? Internal strength/aiki skills? Or are the two are the same?
I am sorry if I seem overly hung up on this issue of enlightenment and martial ability. I just have a hard time seeing that they are the same.