I am able to describe the feeling as I experience blissfulness (in my humble opinion) and a bout of various realisations time and again. That is however not constant.
I do agree that our(soul) original/ internal nature is blissful (full of love beyond boundaries) however since we are contaminated by being in contact with material world and 24 senses, we are unable to ‘truly-realise’ the actual original state of being eternally blissful because we are unable to surrender. Tru surrender will happen when we have no need to exist away from the original source.
The fact that there is I, means there is a need for identity (ego) being identified separately from God himself…So I fail to understand what this I AM THAT means. If the author means to say I AM THAT (Blissful) Okay I agree but if it means I am GOD and nothing else, it makes no sense to me, it’s just too annoying people not accepting the supreme controller /creator of the universe/ Purusha/ the ultimate enjoyer instead associate themselves as Prakriti /Durga/ Nature/ Universe, which is the field (ksetre) and not the knower of the field (individual soul/kshtre jnana)
Let’s accept there is the Supreme energy that’s what the truly self realised souls, Lord Christ, Shri Said Baba , mother Theresa even, Srila Prabhupada and many more divine saints praised, preached about, creating miracles
This knowledge or being temporarily blissful still is scratching surface as realising one element of God is not becoming God or merging with God as we are and will remain part and parcels of HIM and NOT HIM.
And thus, I am not THAT, I aspire to be merged with the ‘divine THAT’ hopefully if I can give up the need to exist away from HIM.
You are this universe is just superficial level of understanding as I said, scratching the surface.