The climax principle asserts that a sequence of similar phrases should be interpreted climactically even if the words and grammatical constructs used do not directly suggest this. That is the fact of the sequence justifies reading into the Biblical text a climactic interpretation even if no other textual source justifies it. For this reason we consider the climax method a distinct and separate method.

The climax principle is illustrated by verse Gn24-55c, discussing the request, by the family of the soon to-be-wed bride that she be allowed to stay home a little longer before leaving, states And her brother and her mother said:
• 'Let the damsel abide with us days,
• or ten;
after that she shall go.'

An initial interpretation could be literal as indicated by the bracketed words And her brother and her mother said:
• 'Let the damsel abide with us [a few]days,
• or ten [days];
after that she shall go.'

Rashi however objects to such an explanation. True - such an explanation is consistent with word meaning and grammar But it is non-climatic. People simply don't speak that way. They don't ask for a few days and then say but if I can't get a few let me get 10. Such a sequencing is anti-climactic.

Rashi therefore provides an interpretation consistent with climax. And her brother and her mother said:
• 'Let the damsel abide with us days [a year],
• or ten [months];
after that she shall go.' It is important to understand the underlying Rashi methods: Rashi is using climax The climax principle allows us to interpret the ambiguous ten as meaning ten months versus ten days. The Bible occasionally uses the word days to mean year and since year versus a few days is consistent with climax Rashi so interprets.

Modern scholarship uses the term parallelism to explain what we have called Climax. Professor Kugel in particular has emphasized that parallelism in the biblical Poetic literature should be interpreted climactically, as this gives the most natural and authentic rendering of the text.