Definition: $A$ is ordinal if and only if $A$ is transitive and well-ordered under $\in$.
Theorem: For any two ordinals $x$ and $y$, either $x\in y$, or $x=y$, or $y\in x$.
A corollary that I proved and is available to use: If $A$ is an ordinal, then any member of $A$ is an ordinal too.
I have tried hard, but to no avail. Please give me some hints on this theorem!
For given ordinals $x$ and $y$ the following claims hold true:
For $x=y$, the theorem is trivially true. For $x\neq y$, let $z=x\cap y$, hence $z$ is an ordinal. We will prove this case by contradiction.
Assume $x\not\subsetneq y$ and $y\not\subsetneq x$. Since $z\subsetneq x$ and $z$ is an ordinal, then $z\in x$. Similarly, $z\in y$. Thus $z\in x\cap y=z$, which contradicts the fact that $z$ is ordinal and hence well-ordered under $\in$. As a result, either $x\subsetneq y$ or $y\subsetneq x$.