There is a difference of opinion among the commentaries when the five daughters of Tzlofchad approach Moshe with their question as to whether daughters inherit their fathers in the absence of sons. Their clarion cry is "give us an inheritance among our father's brothers" (Bamidbar 27:4). The Yalkut Shimoni (chapter 773) learns that the incident took place in the 2nd year of their being in the desert, immediately after the sin of the spies. The commentary Zayis Raanan on the above Yalkut presents the second opinion that goes with the order that it is presented in the Torah, namely, the daughters of Tzlofchad came after the death of Aharon, in the fortieth year (see Rashi 26:13). Following Aharon's demise, they started traveling in the opposite direction, away from Israel back towards Egypt. Regardless of the timing, what is most exemplary on the part of these five righteous women is that at a time when the popular tide and trend of the nation was "let us appoint a leader and let us return to Egypt" (Bamidbar 14:4) they requested an inheritance in the Land of Israel
The Yalkut derives a most important principle from the above: one who lives in a society that is practicing evil, but has the integrity and commitment to buck the system and do what is right, not only receives his due reward, but also all the potential reward and blessings that could have been accrued by the generation. Thus, just as Noach at the time of the flood, Avraham at the generation of the haflaga (Tower of Babel and time of national dispersion) and even Lot in S'dom, received the potential reward of their generations, so to the daughters of Tzlofchad not only received their reward for their love of the Land and pining, but received the reward that was potentially awaiting the rest of the generation.
The above Yalkut teaches that not every mitzvah is created equally. Often the timing and environment of the mitzvah, and whether it is popularly observed with relative ease or requires major sacrifice to rise to the occasion, will determine the significance of the mitzvah. We are all familiar with the sociological history of America seventy to eighty years ago when many immigrants came to its shores and had to make a most difficult sacrifice on behalf of Shabbos. If one didn't come to work on a Saturday they were not welcomed at work on Monday. Today, most persons have little difficulty timing a job that allows them to observe Shabbos. Moreover, the law prohibits today religious discrimination. Kashrus at one time was a major challenge. It's hard to believe that there really was a time when kosher pizza, Chinese, Mexican, sushi, and every other cuisine, was not available. Timing and sacrifice play a significant role.
A further proof that not all mitzvos are created equal: the Gra notes in his commentary to the Talmud Yuma 22B (Sefer Meor Hagadol on Aggados of Shas) that Shaul erred in one sin, and it was reckoned against him - he lost the throne, whereas David erred in two sins and it was not reckoned against him. The Gra explains that here as well, it was not Divine favoritism towards one over the other, rather, the mitzvah of Shaul to blot out Amalek was a communal one that he violated, a mitzvah that only he as king of Israel could do. His violation thereof was therefore punished in a most severe way. The two sins of David were of a personal nature, and they were thus forgivable after and including personal punishments. Once again, timing played a most significant role in the assessment of mitzvos and aveiros.
The mishna in Avos (5:3) teaches that Avraham received "sechar kulam"- the reward that was potentially due to the ten generations, between Noach and Avraham. Rabbeinu Yona explains that this does not mean that he took their sechar in a literal sense, but rather he that filled the gap that they left in their neglect, and his living a life of mitzvos accomplished and had the value of all of theirs' combined.
One of the most challenging mitzvos we face, especially in our generation, during the summer is that of "v'haya machanecha kadosh"- your environment should be holy, worthy of the Shechinah. The Chofetz Chaim notes that only a breach of tznius evokes Hashem's threat to withdraw from our midst. Therefore, in a season when the actions of those around us threaten to distance the Shechinah from us, we are presented with a unique opportunity to up to the temptations of our environmental pressures that run counter to modesty. We are able in this season to single-handedly bring the Shechinah into our midst to the same degree that would be the result of everyone dressing modestly.
While the mishnah in Sanhedrin teaches that each person is a world unto themselves, this Yalkut teaches how one person can literally uphold the world by themselves.