A materialistic interpretation may be that spirituality is nothing but a personal physical experience.
However, a non-materialistic interpretation could be that the robot is considered to be an extension of another person that created it.
But then again, I can perceive the robot as being created by an advanced AI, where the AI learned about spirituality and created the robot in a creative act of manufacturing not influenced by any former teacher, in a manner such as monkeys eventually randomly typing the entire work of Hamlet[1].
However, the random act of unspiritual creation of a robot spiritual leader by AI doesn't prove that the robot entity is unspiritual. The spirituality of the robot could, in theory, have been created ex nihilo or from some pre-existing form that was or was not part of the material world.
So there seem to be three logical options:
1. The robot may not be spiritual, only material.
2. The robot may be spiritual, but only in its material form.
3. The robot, whether it exists or not in the material world, could be linked to a pre-existing or post-existing spiritual form, neither defining the robot itself as having a spirit or not having a spirit, but also not negating that it could.
The third, I think, may be closest to the Buddhist interpretation, and leaves most options open metaphysically.
In that, we arrive where we started. We know more than when we started, such that we're enlightened, but at the same time we may know no more for certain than when we considered the robot.