Do any Buddhist schools talk about the idea of a pure “witness-consciousness”? If yes how do they view it?

In several contemplative traditions, such as Advaita Vedanta, there is the idea of a “witness-consciousness” or “knower-consciousness” that stands apart from thoughts, sensations, and experiences. This witnessing awareness is often treated as the 'true' or 'pure' Self, something unchanging and fundamental that observes the flux of mental and physical phenomena. Analogously, in Kashmir Śaivism, philosophers like Utpaladeva argue in works such as Ajada Pramatra Siddhi that there is an 'ultimate knower' which must also be inherently sentient, self-revealing consciousness, and not insentient or conditioned under dependent origination, explicitly critiquing Buddhist positions such as Vijñānavāda on the nature of consciousness and selfhood. (The text is quite short and can be read here and here ) ---------- Given all this, I am curious how various Buddhist schools engage with or respond to this idea of a witness-consciousness or the knower-consciousness. If such a witnessing consciousness is rejected, how is it explained phenomenologically? Is the sense of being a “knower” understood as merely a conceptual imputation on the five aggregates, or could it be interpreted as some kind of emergent property arising from them? Alternatively, do any Buddhist schools come close to accepting something like a reflexive or self-knowing awareness without committing to a metaphysical self? I am especially interested in how different traditions such as Theravāda, Madhyamaka, and Yogācāra would approach this issue, and whether any schools of buddhism had direct historical engagements or debates with thinkers like Utpaladeva or similar arguments from non-Buddhist traditions.